My father recently passed away and his rental properties passed into the care of my mother and myself. Four years before passed away he signed am agreement to have waste service solely with one company. However the company has tripled the price over fair market competitors. We would like to quit their services. But the company says we are bound to their service agreement and cannot quit. Are we legally bound to my fathers contract now that the property has passed on to us?

>Merged Threads<

You say you inherited, but you also say 'passed into the care of.' Were the properties in his name rather than a trust or corporation or other entity?

You say you inherited, but you also say 'passed into the care of.' Were the properties in his name rather than a trust or corporation or other entity?
The rental property was jointly owned by my father and mother. Now it will solely be in her name. The property is part of a trust now in my mothers name. I care for and manage the property since she is elderly. My father was sick and elderly too and unfortunately very trusting and signed up for many things that have made life complicated for my mom now that he has passed. She however was not aware of this service contract till after he passed?

My father recently passed away and his rental property passed into my care. My elderly mother is now sole owner of the rental property. I manage it for her as she is not able to. Four years before he passed away he signed an agreement to have waste service provided solely with one company. However the company has tripled the price over fair market prices. She is no longer able to afford their high fees. We would like to quit their services and use a new provider. But the company says we are bound to their service agreement and cannot quit. And if we were to sell the property that the new owners would be bound to use their services. Are we legally bound to my fathers contract now that he has passed? No one was aware of this contract till after his death. He was the only one to sign. Thank you in advance for your help.

>Merged Threads<

No you are not under such an obligation. The only thing that you need to do is make sure that they are paid for services rendered.

No you are not under such an obligation. The only thing that you need to do is make sure that they are paid for services rendered.

Thank you for you answer! All services have been paid for and there is no money owed. But future charges will be $190 a month for weekly waste can removal. The contract he signed states in fine print " this agreement shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefits of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns". So we are concerned that they could place a lien on the property for the six years remaining on the contract. They " graciously" offered my mother cancellation of the contract if she paid them a $1000 fee. I appreciate your answer as they are holding her financially hostage

It would be illegal for him to sign a contract that encumbers others beyond his passing. She might want to spend the $1,000 towards a lawyer and maybe she can get a rebate.

It would be illegal for him to sign a contract that encumbers others beyond his passing. She might want to spend the $1,000 towards a lawyer and maybe she can get a rebate.

Wonderful! Thank you for your response. We will look into a lawyer like you suggest.

Careful - it is perfectly legal for a business to have a contract that carries over when the business is sold or transferred. The language cited by the OP says precisely that ("successors and assigns"), so if the mother has taken over the business she has also taken over the business's existing contracts.

The question that I have is what language does the contract have regarding pricing and the term of the contract? Also, please confirm that the language you are citing is from the actual copy of the contract that your father signed.

Agree with ebaines... it's legal for business to do this. You should look into the contract again...

Rental properties is not a rental business unless it is held separate. A business can sign contracts that encumber that business but there also needs to be reafirmation if it changes hands. Contracts can say whatever they want but that doesn't mean its legally binding. This appears to be a private matter unless the OP comes back to tell us somethig different.

for the six years remaining on the contract.

That is the key! You should have stated that the contract was for a specific term. It would have given you more correct answers. Your father entered into a contract that has a specific term. The "successors and assigns" clause, binds you to the contract for the remainder of the term. And I agree with ebaines, that this will be viewed as commercial contract.

Unless there is language that will allow you an out, then you are stuck. You might want to look at the buyout offered. Compare the difference between them and other companies, the $1K may actually save money in the long run. You said they are triple, So if they charge $190/month, that means you could save over $100 a month by switching. That means you can recoup the $1K in less than a year. Looks to me like a reasonable offer. And next time have your attorney review such contracts.

The only other out I see is if you can prove your father was not competent when he signed that contract. But that is going to be very difficult.

I missed the 6 years term info when I wrote my previous post. But I still wonder what it says about pricing. I interpreted the original post to say that the service provider had raised their prices under the terms of the contract after the father died, which they would not be allowed to do unless there is some language in the contract about price rises. But if instead what happened is the father signed a 6-year contract agreeing to a price that was triple what he could have bargained for - well, sorry, but that's business.

I missed the 6 years term info when I wrote my previous post. But I still wonder what it says about pricing. I interpreted the original post to say that the service provider had raised their prices under the terms of the contract after the father died, which they would not be allowed to do unless there is some language in the contract about price rises. But if instead what happened is the father signed a 6-year contract agreeing to a price that was triple what he could have bargained for - well, sorry, but that's business.

I assumed that the contract provided for annual increases, at unspecified rates. But that does raise the question about what the contract says about rates and rate increases. I'm convinced the contract is binding unless the contractor is violating it in some other way. But the OP needs to read the contract and tell us its written terms.

I assumed that the contract provided for annual increases, at unspecified rates. But that does raise the question about what the contract says about rates and rate increases. I'm convinced the contract is binding unless the contractor is violating it in some other way. But the OP needs to read the contract and tell us its written terms.
The property is a two complex apartment rental so it islisted as a residence. The waste company has it listed as a business in their records.
I'm not sure if it would legally be considered a business or just two homes since it is rented out.
The original rate agreed to in the contract was for $72.05 monthly with a $10 lock fee and a "customer service assisted payment charge" of $8 = $90.05 monthly.

As for increases in charges the contract the contract states "Customer shall pay for the services furnished by the company in accordance with the Charges on the agreement, as it may be adjusted over the terms of this agreement as noted herein (the "charges"). The company reserves the right to increase the Charges payable by customer during the term."
So yes the waste management company can increase the price as much as they want to as often as they want to.

Since it sounds like we are bound to the contract. Which also renews every six years. Unless you formally request to terminate contract 90 days before the renewal period goes into effect.

From what I have read here we were afraid of this. Other waste removal services offer identical services for $49.50 monthly. So yes it would be cost effective to just pay the $1000 fee, get out of the contract, and use a more affordable service provider that does not lock you into a contract. This will not be financially easy for my mother to absorb this cost. But what ever causes the least damage is probably the best solution in this case.
.
I have always been one who is hesitant to sign contracts. And this is another example of why I will be even more wary. I just never knew you could be held to contracts signed by someone else.

Thank you all for your answers. This has been most helpful

'The property is a two complex apartment rental so it islisted as a residence. The waste company has it listed as a business in their records.'

How are names stated at the beginning of the contract? Just individual(s) or what?

"Rental properties is not a rental business unless it is held seperate." What does this mean. " held separate"
The rental property is a 2 unit apartment with 1 tenant each. The city calls it a residence but the waste management says we are a business. I realize that my mother renting out an apartment does not make her a business. But what about legaly?

The only name in the contract is my fathers and the name of the waste management company. With the service address as the apartments. And the billing address as his family home.

So yes. Just an individual. My dad.

I think you could refuse to continue, and refuse to buy the contract out. Let the burden be on them to try to sue you. I don't think they will.

I have thought of that. I'm just worried that they could put a lien on the property. That is the only thing holding us back.

I am however curious about what user ebaines said about this being a business contract. Is it really a business contract or a contract with an individual. My father. They have no "business" they could come after. The only personal information they have is my dads. They don't even know my mom exists. Since I handle everything. And they have none of my personal info. Let them come after my dad. It doesn't matter now that he has passed. Unless they can come after the apartment.

Unless your father and mother lived on the property at the time the contract was entered into, I think they can successfully argue that they contracted with a person running an apartment rental business.

Lets look at what would happen if they sued. They would, In my opinion, win that you are bound by the contract. In which case, you owe them for the months that you did not pay and for the balance of the contract, plus legal fees.

Yes. Ultimately in the long term I think it may be best to pay to get out of the contract and just pay the termination fee. I'd hate to take a gamble and end up paying more in the long run. It really is just tying up loose ends after a loved one dies. And it should be tax deductible. So that's a plus. Thank you for your advice

Good luck

I'm still inclined to think you can put the burden on them. I'm just not seeing a clear case.

We are ultimately going to ask the lawyer that is helping us tie up all the loose ends after my fathers death. I'll let you know what happens. If you are curious? Maybe this will help someone else in a similar predicament.

Yes please do.

"Rental properties is not a rental business unless it is held seperate." What does this mean. " held separate"
The rental property is a 2 unit apartment with 1 tenant each. The city calls it a residence but the waste management says we are a business. I realize that my mother renting out an apartment does not make her a business. But what about legaly?

The held separate would be if your dad was incorperated or a LLC (Limited Liability Company). The funds for the business are usually held separate from the funds the household runs on. He may take a draw from the earnings as his pay. That would have been separate from his personal holdings.

Also when you do get back with us please let us know the area you live in or the area the property is involved in. Local laws make the difference for many answers.

I have thought of that. I'm just worried that they could put a lien on the property. That is the only thing holding us back.

I am however curious about what user ebaines said about this being a business contract. Is it really a business contract or a contract with an individual. My father. They have no "business" they could come after. The only personal information they have is my dads. They don't even know my mom exists. Since I handle everything. And they have none of my personal info. Let them come after my dad. It doesn't matter now that he has passed. Unless they can come after the apartment.

They cannot "put a lien on the property" unless they first successfully sue you. I don't think they can successfully sue.

I disagree with a distinction that Ebaines and ScottGem are trying to make concerning whether it was "a business" or not. In my humble opinion, that makes no difference.


Careful - it is perfectly legal for a business to have a contract that carries over when the business is sold or transferred. The language cited by the OP says precisely that ("successors and assigns"), so if the mother has taken over the business she has also taken over the business's existing contracts.

What you may be thinking of, Ebaines, is a corporation or other business form which has perpetual ownership and which the mother would now own. Sure, the entity would still be bound by the contract, but not sucessors. But as I understand it, this is not the case. The property was passed from the deceased father to the trust. The only way the contract could survive is if had been recorded, or the trust was otherwise put on notice. The ("successors and assigns" to which you refer only holds up that way.

What does matter is whether OP was put on notice of the contract when OP obained ownership. As I understand it, OP obtained title through some sort of a testamentary trust. So, when the property was conveyed to the trust, assuming the contract had not at that time been recorded, or the trustee was aware of the contract, the owner of the contract can no longer enforce it.