HELP AND ADVISE NEEDED

[Tom]

the only agreement to the sponsorship for the team was written on the team forum and pinned. Well just before litigaton was mention by said owner, he amended the terms of the sponsorship. So instead of said sponsorship for the period 2012, it now read sponsorship beginning 2012 running into 2013. The date stamp of the amendment shows this. Said owner is trying to cover his own tracks

So there was a contract, even if you joined the team later then you have taken on your part in the team contract.
The contract was amended at a later date, Perfectly fine if a contract details a period and it is extended.
Fid you rename the team before of after the amendment?
If after then the above implies you and him have access to the team forum, this implies a connection still,

If you have left then you should no longer have access to his team forum
If it is the teams as an entity that has become sponsored by him then he shoud no longer be in the forum once you parted

Asmentioned long ago this should be dealt with between you, him and the team. Not publicly

 

[Tom]

Said owner is suing his own team!!! go figure


The whole team bar one decided to start a new team because no sponsorship was promised for 2013. If we had continued with the original team name then we would have been sued for using said team without permission, even though the team name isnt trademarked. Didnt realise said owner has rights to abbreviations to S.W.A.T. !!!!

It does not necessarily need to be trademarked or copyrighted.
If there is a paintball business trading as SWAT that sponsors a paintball team giving them the name SWAT and they part company, then to continue to use SWAT in the context of paintball could cause confusion, could be deliverate to keep influence of the name, or could be a plan to disrepute the company. Any of those and many other situations can be valid to demand ceasing to use a name.

 

[fathead]

after I was told we would not be getting sponsored for the 2013 season by another memeber of the team who works with him 6 days a week after i tried to contact him an even asked his daugter to find out for me, I said to the guys that I didn't want to play for swat as we not being sponsored by him but promoting his company and business on our expense? I still wanted to play, I spoke to a few new guys and they wanted to try sup air and the other members of team still wanted to play, so we not me we made a new team, but they all said if we're not being sponsored and was paying it out of there own pocket then they wanted to have there own name, something they can say they done, team swat is still going has a new team just the old players have left,

 

[fathead]

I have a Brother that`s a Judge, and he reckons that if a Player joins any Team/company that is known to have you work/play under a contract, that contract should be honoured, usually for what the player receives or for the time spent with the team, meaning if a player leaves before the time of contract expires then the player will pay fees to the team, now if the Team is known to " have all players under contract ", then anybody that plays with that Team is Liable whether a piece of paper was signed or Not, because that player accepted the conditions of a contract, and even Verbal is taken as fact. therefore that player is Liable.

But surely you need proof of all this not just on one mans say so? And also proof of what he has given us for the season? So I or another team member would of signed for stuff he is saying he has given us????

 

[M4rkm93]

I'm almost sure that if a contract hadn't been given in writing to you or outlined via for example an email, then you should be under no lawful obligation to make any payments, etc. If taken to a small claims court then what proof could SWAT give that a contract was agreed too? ”We shook hands on it, so swab my hand for his dna to prove we did?”. I'm pretty sure they're not going to have a recording of you agreeing to it either...

 

[fathead]

I will send him a letter an try and sort this out,
Everyone was happy to keep the name and keep playing for him under that name all everyone wanted was a bit of sponsorship with being told there was no sponsorship no one wanted to play under that name, why its just me being targeted is an understatement, as he said he owns the name so its his team so its his bill surely? But am nit 100% on thus thats why i asked for help, But I will speak to him an take it up with him, thank you for all your help so far guys really appreaciate it

 

[Tom]

I'm almost sure that if a contract hadn't been given in writing to you or outlined via for example an email, then you should be under no lawful obligation to make any payments, etc. If taken to a small claims court then what proof could SWAT give that a contract was agreed too? ”We shook hands on it, so swab my hand for his dna to prove we did?”. I'm pretty sure they're not going to have a recording of you agreeing to it either...

A contract does not have to be in writing to be enforceable
It has also been mentioned that details were on the team forum

 

[M4rkm93]

A contract does not have to be in writing to be enforceable
It has also been mentioned that details were on the team forum

If it was simply agreeing to an agreement then it is not enforceable. There has to be some evidence of both parties agreeing to the contract set out if there was one.
The offer must have been clearly communicated to the team from SWAT paintball, and if any part of it was particularly vague then the contract is most likely void. (Consider these points)

 

[Tom]

If it was simply agreeing to an agreement then it is not enforceable. There has to be some evidence of both parties agreeing to the contract set out if there was one.
The offer must have been clearly communicated to the team from SWAT paintball, and if any part of it was particularly vague then the contract is most likely void. (Consider these points)

Consider these points:
I have not seen the original post with the letter, but if you go through the posts the situation changes from no contract or agreement ever existing, to the agreement being detailed on the team forum and having been updated at a later date.

Contract law in England requires:
An offer
Unconditional acceptance (this allows for counter offer & negotiation)
The existence of the agreement on the team forum indicates these 2 elements existed (even if subsequent individuals in the team hadn't been party to the original agreement they still take on responsibilties as appropriate by joining the team)
Consideration Everyone must get something out of it. The sponsor receives promotion, the team gets the sponsorship benefits
Terms Not everything in a contract or agreement is considered an enforceable term. This could have bearing on the current situation
Termination A way out of the contract. This definately has a bearing on the current situation
Damages This appears to be the crux of the matter, and the sponsor is seeking them
Intent There must be an intent that the contract or agreement is enforceable. This possibly has a bearing on the current situation as the original poster does not seem to feel he was in a contract (or that he has the impression that because he was told by another individual that the contract/agreement has been terminated or he was able to terminate

 

[Barrage]

Just strange when sports stars have their sponsorship terminated for bad image going against sponsors ideals, that all happens is said sponsorship just ceases. You don't get the sponsor wanting to recoup what the sponsor had outplayed initially.