Yesterday while I was trying quick-watching Better Call Saul, half-awake, I was amused to see a wonderful Jimmy-McGill moment, where he hurriedly drafted a demand using toilet paper calling it a "NOTICE!!"
I wonder how the Laymen watching the show may have become confused about the toilet paper procedure of a cunning lawyer and expected the same from their district court lawyer. But for once, let's try to decode what is a notice? and what's misunderstood about it?
First things first: “Notice” does not mean “Judgment”
There is a particular kind of anxiety attached to receiving a legal notice for the first time. Every line feels personal. Every allegation feels like a finding against you. Every assertion seems like something that, once written down, cannot be undone.
But wait. A notice can certainly be serious. But it itself is not a judgment.
It is basically one side communicating its version of the dispute, setting out its claims or demands, and telling the other side what it expects. The contents can also vary enormously depending on the dispute. It could concern- property, Money, A contract, A business relationship, A family dispute, Employment, Intellectual property, etc.
And this is where one of the first misconceptions begins.
A lawyer's notice is not a/an (Court) Order.
No!!!!!!! A notice should be taken seriously. But it should also be read as a claim, not automatically as a finding.
The fact that something has been written on a lawyer's letterhead does not, by itself, turn every statement in that letter into an established fact. The sender may genuinely believe the allegations. Some may be supported by documents. Some may be disputable. Some may depend upon facts that the recipient remembers differently. And sometimes the real disagreement is not even about whether something happened, but about what legal consequences should follow from what happened.
What happens when you receive one?
This is probably where the practical part matters most. The first instinct of many people is to immediately ask:
“How do I reply?”
However, the best approach is to calm down first. Read the notice once without trying to answer it and then try to identify at least these things.
1. What is the dispute about?
Strip away the legal language for a moment. What is the actual disagreement or subject matter? What is claimed? Try to describe the dispute to yourself in two or three plain sentences. If you cannot do that, you probably have not understood the notice yet.
2. Who is making the claim?
Identify the sender. and try to find whether the person has any locus standi to make such communication or notice. This becomes particularly important where someone is claiming rights over property, money, contractual obligations, company affairs or acting on behalf of another person. The identity and authority of the person making the demand can matter.
3. What exactly is being alleged?
This is where people often get overwhelmed. A notice may contain several paragraphs of allegations and legal language.
Separate the factual assertions from the conclusions.
For example:
“You failed to make payment of ₹X on the agreed date.”- is a factual assertion capable of being checked against the agreement, records and payment history.
Whereas: “You have deliberately cheated my client.”- is a much broader allegation about conduct. They should not simply be read as though every sentence carries the same meaning or legal significance.
4. What documents are being relied upon?
Look at the documents referred to in the notice. Then look at your own documents. Agreements, Receipts, Bank records, Emails, WhatsApp messages, Letters, Previous notices, etc., anything else relevant to the dispute and don't only look for documents that help you. Look for the documents that tell you what actually happened. That is a much more useful exercise.
5. What is your version of events?
This is perhaps the most important part. Write down the chronology.
What happened first?
What happened next?
What was agreed?
What was paid?
What was delivered?
What was communicated?
When did the disagreement actually begin?
Which facts are clearly true?
Which are disputed?
Which do you simply not remember?
This is far more useful to your lawyer than:
“Everything in this notice is false.”
Your lawyer needs facts before conclusions.
Since what you may represent now could be used in the Court.
Should you immediately send a reply?
Well, it depends. Best course would be to discuss the pros. In this case- your trusted lawyer.
Comments
Post a Comment