Failure to Provide Translated Copy of Contract

[13babul13]

My question involves a consumer law issue in the State of: CA

Hi,

I'll try to be brief. About a year ago, my mother bought a small ATM machine from Wells Fargo. When she bought the machine, the banker translated the documents of the sale. My mother didn't want to get into a contract, since she had a bad experience with a bill payment machine several years ago. The banker told my mother that it wasn't a contract. That all she needed to do was buy the machine. What the banker didn't tell my mother was that there would be a contract for the service.

My mother doesn't speak or understand English. All negotiations were done in the Spanish language. She was never provided a copy of the documents she signed in Spanish. The banker translated the documents, but hid the fact that it was a contract. I am aware that bankers get points and bonuses based on the amount of sales they do; I truly believe the rewards influenced the banker to lie about the information in the documents.

I am aware of the California Civil Code 1619 that requires the business to provide a copy of the contract in the language it was negotiated in. And if a translation is done on the spot, that the party doing the translation be not associate to the business or around those lines.

Yet, I am not certain the the above law applies to the case at issue. I want to call and argue based on the facts provided, but I am not sure if the law protects my mother and what other legal alternatives there are.

I would really appreciate your help.

Thank you!

[Mr. Knowitall]

I expect you mean Civil Code Sec. 1632, but that relates to the initial negotiation for the described classes of contract and not to contact from a bill collector.

But let's back up for a minute. Is your goal to now get a copy of the contract, or is it a hope to rescind the purchase agreement based upon the non-provision of the translated contract at the time of negotiation? Did your mother in fact enter a contract with Wells Fargo for service of the ATM, or has the machine been sitting idle for the past year?

How did your mother believe the machine would be serviced and supported - connected to bank information, and periodically filled with cash and cleared of deposits - if not through an ongoing contract with a financial institution?

[13babul13]

I expect you mean Civil Code Sec. 1632, but that relates to the initial negotiation for the described classes of contract and not to contact from a bill collector.

But let's back up for a minute. Is your goal to now get a copy of the contract, or is it a hope to rescind the purchase agreement based upon the non-provision of the translated contract at the time of negotiation? Did your mother in fact enter a contract with Wells Fargo for service of the ATM, or has the machine been sitting idle for the past year?

How did your mother believe the machine would be serviced and supported - connected to bank information, and periodically filled with cash and cleared of deposits - if not through an ongoing contract with a financial institution?

Yes, you are correct. I do mean Civil Code Sec. 1632. It hasn't gone to collections still.

My goal is rescind the service contract with the bank not the sale of the machine. After been with Wells Fargo for the year or so, my mother got a better deal from Bank of America. Wells Fargo charges a service fee of $35.00 plus other additional charges. Bank of America charges $16.00 for the same service.

My mother was basically lured in with the idea that there would not be a contract. Several years ago, she got into a contract with Northern Leasing, I don't know if you hear of that company. It was basically a scam of some sort. Again, she didn't understood the contract but still proceeded to signed solely based on the trust to the sales person. So she clearly wanted to avoid the contract at all cost. She was told that it wasn't a contract.

I personally believe the banker lied to get the points and bonuses the bank gives out. The banker didn't care about the long term consequences of the sale. Since he was the one who translated the documents, he had the control to interpret the clauses of the contract that were more convenient without consideration to my mother's wishes.

Does the civil section mentioned apply to the case? Or are there other laws that would protect my mother? The amount required to quit the lease is $500. It might not seem much, well it isn't much, it could be worst. But our business is going down. So it is a fee we want to avoid.

Thank you! I really appreciate it.

[Mr. Knowitall]

I don't see the contract you describe as falling into any of the subcategories of Civil Code Sec. 1632(b).

You still haven't made clear whether the Spanish language version of the contract was signed, or if the bank is seeking to enforce a signed English language version of the contract. If it's the former, and the contract in fact does not include a provision for monthly service fees or early termination fees, then you can avoid those fees as a matter of contract. If it's the latter but the Spanish "translation" of the contract misrepresents the terms and conditions of the English version that was subsequently signed, and you can document that difference, you may be able to avoid the misrepresented terms or have recourse against the person who misrepresented those terms.

[jk]

Yes, you are correct. I do mean Civil Code Sec. 1632. It hasn't gone to collections still.

My goal is rescind the service contract with the bank not the sale of the machine. After been with Wells Fargo for the year or so, my mother got a better deal from Bank of America. Wells Fargo charges a service fee of $35.00 plus other additional charges. Bank of America charges $16.00 for the same service.
.

Your mother failed to practice due diligence. She needs to take contracts to a person (like maybe a lawyer) who can explain them to her if she does not understand what is in the contract. She should simply figure that everything she signs is a contract in some way because, generally, it is.

Attempting to rescind the contract will likely cost you more than the $500 termination fee if you have to use the services of a lawyer.

Beyond that, if the service was part of the sale, rescinding the contract would likely result in the ATM being returned as well. It is unlikely you can separate the two.

[13babul13]

I don't see the contract you describe as falling into any of the subcategories of Civil Code Sec. 1632(b).

You still haven't made clear whether the Spanish language version of the contract was signed, or if the bank is seeking to enforce a signed English language version of the contract. If it's the former, and the contract in fact does not include a provision for monthly service fees or early termination fees, then you can avoid those fees as a matter of contract. If it's the latter but the Spanish "translation" of the contract misrepresents the terms and conditions of the English version that was subsequently signed, and you can document that difference, you may be able to avoid the misrepresented terms or have recourse against the person who misrepresented those terms.

She never signed a Spanish contract. She was never provided or saw a copy of the contract in the Spanish language. She only signed the English contract based on the translation of the banker. All contact with the banker was done in the Spanish language.

Doesn't the law provided that if the contract is translated, it cannot be by an employee of the business? Anyone can clearly see the motives why a banker would misrepresent a contract. If the banker had told my mother ... you are entering into a 3 year contract... she would have run away.

Thank you again.

[jk]

as Mr. K stated, he does not see the law being applicable. Would you care to point out the specific section that you believe makes the law applicable?




http://law.onecle.com/california/civil/1632.html