Question on contracts

I know you are not a/my lawyer
Suppose I write a contract banning you from doing something for an amount of money to be given on a certain date like
In exchange for $1000 paid on October 1, 2018 you agree not to post on Facebook from October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2019.

What happens if I don’t pay you until October 8th? ISTM there is an argument that since I did not meet my end of the contract it is void as of October 2, 2018. Certainly putting a date in a contract should mean something not “When I said the 1st it really is whenever I get around to it.”

And if that is the case, what is the status of the $1000?

If the contract says you’ll pay me on the 1st and on (say) the 3rd you still haven’t paid me, I can treat the contract as breached and post away to my heart’s content. Obviously, in that case, you’re unlikely to offer payment on the 8th,

However, suppose I don’t post and, on the 8th, you offer me the money. If I accept it, I will be treated as forgiving the breach (failure to pay on the 1st) and ratifying the contract, and so will be bound by it.

IANAL but it seems to me that a well-written contract would cover the question of what happens if the payment is late.

I agree with UDS’s answer.

Having paid late also does not entitle you to re-set the dates of performance. The money is owed and performance ensues upon payment, and ends on the date provided in the contract.

Paying late puts you in breach, but it does not automatically void the contract. It is up to the other party to negotiate the outcome. In all but the most extreme cases, the party would in “good faith” perform for that week while payment was forthcoming.

The other party could technically demand interest for the 7 days.

great thread

It would be better if the contract specified what happens if there is a breach by the performer.

They may say posting on facebook took one minute, so they performed for the whole month, less a minute.

What happens if at court the argument is that the action was performed by an ameteur.

The company wants their $1000 back… so the performer says “I only posted to facebook as an ameteur”… and so therefore not on behalf of company. The company can only stop what they have the power to stop, and banning person from facebook is a third party boycott, if its not work, that applies ? If its an ordinary work contract, its also outside 40 hour week

I’ve previously mentioned my friend John’s experience with one of the largest auto insurance companies.

He was late paying his premium but they cashed his check and sent him no adverse notice. Later when he filed a claim, they informed him he was in breach. Then they returned the funds paid.

Sometimes it seems like American law books should be thrown away and replaced with a single sentence:* “Judgement in favor of the side with the more expensive lawyers.”*