# Legal strength of "If you fail to respond ..." **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 18, 2016, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136 "2016-08-18T00:50:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/1 "2016-08-18T00:50:13Z")
I’ve seen people claim that when dealing in pro per in a civil issue, they will send a letter (CM/RRR of course) stating something like “Failure to respond within 10 days, you agree to …” and then set out some demands. Most of the time the demands deal with the case at hand like “you agree to drop all claims …” and sometimes they are the something for nothing claims like “you agree to pay me $100,000 US dollars.” If the other side fails to respond in time, then have they legally agreed to the demands if it ends up in court later? Does it make a difference if there is already a current issue (like a creditor/debtor or two people in an accident negotiating) and the demands pertain to the case (“you agree not to sue …”) or can anyone use any civil law justification and make up demands (“You violated my copyright. If you fail to respond within 7 days you agree to pay me $150,000”) and put them on the clock legally speaking? ---
**Author:** ![Patch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/a183cd/32.png) [@Patch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patch)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/2 "2016-08-18T01:21:00Z")
Not a lawyer, but I’ve seen this come up in the Sovereign Citizen bullcrap, where they’ll send such letters out stating similar things such as “failure to respond within 30 days means you agree to pay me $10 \*\*million \*\*dollars!” (insert Dr. Evil post here) The consensus I’ve seen from attorneys in the forums discussing it is it’s not enforceable. You can’t tie someone into a contract simply because they fail to respond. ---
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 1:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/3 "2016-08-18T01:59:59Z")
> [@Patch](#): > > Not a lawyer, but I’ve seen this come up in the Sovereign Citizen bullcrap, where they’ll send such letters out stating similar things such as “failure to respond within 30 days means you agree to pay me $10 \*\*million \*\*dollars!” (insert Dr. Evil post here) The consensus I’ve seen from attorneys in the forums discussing it is it’s not enforceable. You can’t tie someone into a contract simply because they fail to respond. The IRS does that sort of thing as a matter of routine. > [@](#): > > The IRS will send you a Notice of Deficiency CP3219N with a proposal of your tax assessment. This gives you 90 days to either file your overdue tax return or file a petition in Tax Court. If you do nothing, the IRS will proceed with the proposed tax assessment, which will trigger the collection process. > > If an affected taxpayer allows enough time to pass without addressing these notices, it is very possible that the IRS will end up collecting far more than the taxpayer legally owed had he/she filed a correct tax return. Furthermore, if you are due a tax refund, you must file within 3 years of the return due date in order to receive your money. > **[What To Do If You Get a Notice From the IRS](https://www.irs.com/en/what-do-if-you-get-notice-irs/)** > > Tips for Responding to a Federal Tax Notice Every year, the IRS sends millions of letters and notices to taxpayers for various reasons. There are many different types of notices issued by the IRS — depending on the notice you receive, you may have a... And they’ve got about a zillion lawyers and federal judges that will unanimously tell you that yes, it is legal and enforceable. ---
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/4 "2016-08-18T02:38:16Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > The IRS does that sort of thing as a matter of routine. > > [What To Do If You Get a Notice From the IRS](https://www.irs.com/articles/what-do-if-you-get-notice-irs) > > And they’ve got about a zillion lawyers and federal judges that will unanimously tell you that yes, it is legal and enforceable. The difference is that there are laws, passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the President, that say that the IRS can do these things. The IRS did not just make up these rules on its own: [26 U.S. Code § 6212 - Notice of deficiency](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6212) [26 U.S. Code § 6213 - Restrictions applicable to deficiencies; petition to Tax Court](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6213) [26 U.S. Code § 6511 - Limitations on credit or refund](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6511) Unless the entity that is sending you a demand letter of this sort can also cite a similar law that covers their letter, it is not at all comparable to the notices that the IRS might send you. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 6:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/5 "2016-08-18T06:23:13Z")
IANAL, but my understanding is that both sides have to agree to a contract for it to be binding. They have to be presented with the terms and agree with them. You can’t force someone into a contract via inaction. Any situation where that appears to be the case has something else behind it–like a law or a previous agreement. Of course, I’m only commenting because it’s been several hours and no lawyer seems to have responded to your question. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/6 "2016-08-18T06:29:00Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > The IRS does that sort of thing as a matter of routine. > > And they’ve got about a zillion lawyers and federal judges that will unanimously tell you that yes, it is legal and enforceable. There’s a crucial difference. The IRS is notifying you of what they will do if you don’t respond. They’re not saying or implying that your lack of response means you’ve agreed to something. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/7 "2016-08-18T06:33:20Z")
On a separate note, I can think of an example of something similar I was involved with. Back when I was working, I used to do prisoner disciplinary hearings. The prisoner would be read the charges and then given an opportunity to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. I would also tell the prisoner that if he didn’t verbally enter a plea, a plea of not guilty would be made on his behalf. ---
**Author:** ![bob\_2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bob_2/32/3341_2.png) [@bob\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bob_2)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/8 "2016-08-18T10:03:27Z")
In the UK at least, it can have legal validity. Obviously not if I am making some ludicrous demand, but if, for example, I was in a dispute with a supplier who didn’t respond to my request to collect some unwanted item. A registered letter saying "_If you do not respond to my request within_ [say]\* ten days\*, _I will dispose of the goods"_ would probably be enough, if they later tried to demand the money or the goods. I would add that I would only be entitled to defray my expenses and if the supplier asked, I would have to hand over any profit. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/9 "2016-08-18T12:07:40Z")
> [@bob\_2](#): > > In the UK at least, it can have legal validity. Obviously not if I am making some ludicrous demand, but if, for example, I was in a dispute with a supplier who didn’t respond to my request to collect some unwanted item. A registered letter saying "_If you do not respond to my request within_ [say]\* ten days\*, _I will dispose of the goods"_ would probably be enough, if they later tried to demand the money or the goods. Maybe. The law on uncollected goods is quite problematic. And to the extent such a notice worked it would probably on the basis of a particular statute. There is such a statute in my jurisdiction for example. The general rule is that you need offer and acceptance to form a contract. Unless you have some form of pre-existing explicit or implied agreement or arrangement with the offeree to the effect that the offeree is prepared for silence to mean acceptance, it isn’t. Not only that but even if there was acceptance the examples in this thread so far would not form enforceable contracts anyway because there is no consideration ie the offeror is not offering to give the offeree anything in return for the offeror’s proposed “deal”. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/10 "2016-08-18T12:11:02Z")
> [@bob\_2](#): > > In the UK at least, it can have legal validity. Obviously not if I am making some ludicrous demand, but if, for example, I was in a dispute with a supplier who didn’t respond to my request to collect some unwanted item. A registered letter saying "_If you do not respond to my request within_ [say]\* ten days\*, _I will dispose of the goods"_ would probably be enough, if they later tried to demand the money or the goods. > > I would add that I would only be entitled to defray my expenses and if the supplier asked, I would have to hand over any profit. Again, note, you’re saying “after X time, this is what _I_ will do,” not “what _you_ will do.” ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/11 "2016-08-18T12:46:50Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Again, note, you’re saying “after X time, this is what _I_ will do,” not “what _you_ will do.” Exactly. “If you fail to respond in 10 days, I will serve and file a statement of claim against you” = perfectly reasonable. “If you fail to respond in 10 days, you agree you owe me $1 million” = totally unenforceable. ---
**Author:** ![Princhester](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3e96dc/32.png) [@Princhester](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Princhester)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/12 "2016-08-18T13:52:49Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Again, note, you’re saying “after X time, this is what _I_ will do,” not “what _you_ will do.” It’s not quite that simple. **bob++** is positing that by saying this, one is affecting the rights of the owner of the goods. He is not merely saying that he is going to do something. He is saying he is going to do something that affects the owner’s rights, but because of what he has said the owner will have lost their rights. This isn’t generally effective. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/13 "2016-08-18T14:00:43Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > It’s not quite that simple. **bob++** is positing that by saying this, one is affecting the rights of the owner of the goods. He is not merely saying that he is going to do something. He is saying he is going to do something that affects the owner’s rights, but because of what he has said the owner will have lost their rights. > > This isn’t generally effective. Thing is, that would only be tested if the owner brought legal proceedings against _him_. Then he’d find out if giving notice of his intention to dispose of the goods was effective in the circumstances or not. If the owner continued to ignore the situation, you will never know if the letter “worked” or not, because it won’t be put to the test. It is still fundamentally different from saying “if you don’t respond, you agree you owe me money”. It that case, the _writer of the letter_ would have to take positive legal action to get his or her POV enforced. The person who received the letter, simply by continuing to ignore the situation, effectively “wins” unless a court tells them otherwise. In summary: the issue is what happens in a situation in which one party refuses to respond. Who “wins” - the person who refuses to respond, or the person seeking a response? Which party requires the response to be legally effective to “win”, if the party who refuses to respond continues to refuse? ---
**Author:** ![Chihuahua](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dec6dc/32.png) [@Chihuahua](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chihuahua)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/14 "2016-08-18T14:24:52Z")
For OP, this is a very well-documented SovCit intimidation tactic. You cannot unilaterally foist an agreement or penalty onto another person just for failing to obey your wishes. OP might find this instructive: [http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html](http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html) Go ahead and skip to paragraph 447. This document should be the go-to for any question about SovCit or OPCA tactics. **Flyer** , meanwhile, provides a textbook example of SovCit reasoning in action. The SovCit groups believe that they are just as powerful as the government, and a law unto themselves. Therefore, anything the government has the authority to do, a SovCit may also do. Their reasoning ignores the fundamental error that the law grants the government the authority to do certain things. If the IRS sends a collection notice with a penalty attached, it is because a failure to pay to your taxes is a violation of law and the law designates the IRS as the authority in these matters. However, one citizen cannot arbitrarily impose a penalty on another citizen, because the individual citizen does not have the authority to create or enforce their own laws. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2016, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/15 "2016-08-18T14:50:24Z")
> [@Princhester](#): > > It’s not quite that simple. **bob++** is positing that by saying this, one is affecting the rights of the owner of the goods. He is not merely saying that he is going to do something. He is saying he is going to do something that affects the owner’s rights, but because of what he has said the owner will have lost their rights. > > This isn’t generally effective. But the question then becomes whether the action that the letter sender took was reasonable or justified, not whether the letter receiver legally assented to it through inaction. ---
**Author:** ![Isilder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/cc9497/32.png) [@Isilder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isilder)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/16 "2016-08-19T12:57:59Z")
Way back in England, the courts were upholding the terms of such a letter (as in the OP’s letter) that went ignored… So then the courts there decided that the contract must be agreed to positively, it can’t be agreed to by failure to act, and that became a common law principle, as a precedent. So here’s what a contract has to be … [http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/07\_01\_02\_elements\_of\_a\_contract/](http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/07_01_02_elements_of_a_contract/) The thing about having someone elses possessions left incorrectly at your property is dealt with by your state (legislation or common) law covering what happens to someone elses possessions left at your property… ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/17 "2016-08-19T14:59:44Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > But the question then becomes whether the action that the letter sender took was reasonable or justified, not whether the letter receiver legally assented to it through inaction. > [@Isilder](#): > > Way back in England, the courts were upholding the terms of such a letter (as in the OP’s letter) that went ignored… > > So then the courts there decided that the contract must be agreed to positively, it can’t be agreed to by failure to act, and that became a common law principle, as a precedent. > So here’s what a contract has to be … [The Law Handbook](http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/07_01_02_elements_of_a_contract/) > The thing about having someone elses possessions left incorrectly at your property is dealt with by your state (legislation or common) law covering what happens to someone elses possessions left at your property… IANAL, I assume this is the case - it would eventually get to court, the court would determine what was “reasonable” and not. “If you do not remove your junk from my lawn in 10 days I will be forced to charge you for cost of removal”. Technically, failure to act would not be an agreement to pay for removal. The person has already incurred the obligation to move their junk and responsibility for clean-up. How the clean-up happen is what’s in dispute. Then the court looks at what’s happening. Is the dispute correct (is it his junk to move?) Was the other side aware of the problem? (Should they have been?) Was the time allowed long enough? There are no magic “gotcha’s” in law, the actual dispute and its details are the heart of the matter: There’s junk on the lawn. Whose is it? Who has the right to discard it? to sell it? Who is obliged to pay for that disposal? Is the other party aware of the issue? What is a reasonable amount of time to wait? What is a reasonable cost for cleanup and disposal…? So the notice is not a contract and does not create or impose an obligation. It’s just one more step in ensuring that the other side is aware of _some existing obligation / issue_ that they should deal with. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/18 "2016-08-19T15:23:08Z")
My response to a sovereign citizen “if you fail to respond…” letter would of course be to respond with, “If you respond to my response, your response will be taken as acknowledgement that you owe me $1 million for your harassment .” And then just see what happens! ---
**Author:** ![bob\_2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bob_2/32/3341_2.png) [@bob\_2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bob_2)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2016, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/19 "2016-08-19T22:04:50Z")
> [@Isilder](#): > > The thing about having someone else’s possessions left incorrectly at your property is dealt with by your state (legislation or common) law covering what happens to someone else’s possessions left at your property… If you abandoned your car on my drive, I would have to go through some legal process to have it removed. A letter sent to you, saying that if you failed to remove it within ten working days would be sufficient. If I then sold it for scrap, I would be entitled to keep any costs and a \*reasonable \*amount for my trouble. If there was any cash left over, I would have to give it to you. Something similar happened to a friend who emigrated to Australia with his family under the £10 scheme. He drove his family and their mountain of luggage to Southampton to join their ship, and abandoned the car at the dock gates. A year or so later, he was astonished to receive a small check from the Port Authority as the balance due after they had disposed of the car and defrayed their expenses. ---
**Author:** ![Bookkeeper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bookkeeper/32/281_2.png) [@Bookkeeper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bookkeeper)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2016, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136/20 "2016-08-20T23:57:05Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > My response to a sovereign citizen “if you fail to respond…” letter would of course be to respond with, “If you respond to my response, your response will be taken as acknowledgement that you owe me $1 million for your harassment .” > > And then just see what happens! Or simply refuse to accept “joinder” with them. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/legal-strength-of-if-you-fail-to-respond/763136.md?page=2)