Honestly I don't care how long a contract is, or what the terms are. If I don't like it, I won't sign it.

What is questionable to me is to get all the free advertising on the site but to tell your potential customers if they mention the terms of the contract on the site that they won't do business with them.

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
Honestly I don't care how long a contract is, or what the terms are. If I don't like it, I won't sign it.

What is questionable to me is to get all the free advertising on the site but to tell your potential customers if they mention the terms of the contract on the site that they won't do business with them.

Exactly!

My objection to what took place here is twofold. One, the discussion could have been framed generically without the need to drag the agent and his livelihood (rightfully or wrongfully) through this . . . particularly since no attempt was even made with the agent to negotiate the alteration or deletion of the language that is complained of in the first place. (As for the name of the agent not being mentioned, there was certainly enough information given, coupled with copies of the contract being emailed out, that it had to understood it was only a matter of time before the name would work its way into the thread. Whether that was intentional or not is not for me to decide.) Two, the language being complained about is hardly atypical for contracts with outfitters and agents . . . as we have seen with Frank's itty bitty contract. So we single out and condemn this agent as an industry pariah for contractual language that is not particularly uncommon. Is the provision appropriate and what sort of limitation of liability and indemnity would be appropriate in these circumstances . . . that may be a debate worth having, but any hint that this agent is the only agent with such releases and indemnities and is therefore in some way deserving of unique condemnation is just wrong.

As for not wanting the contract to be submitted for the views of the AR intelligentsia, one does not have to hang around here long to understand how quickly such a thread will degenerate . . . as it did here. We have folks that refuse to post hunt reports for goodness sake because keyboard experts want to tear the reports to pieces and turn a memorable experience into a regrettable nightmare. I completely understand his reticence to be singled out for a proctological exam, particularly when he is hardly the only outfitter or agent using provisions akin to that being complained of.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
My objection to what took place here is twofold. One, the discussion could have been framed generically without the need to drag the agent and his livelihood (rightfully or wrongfully) through this . . . particularly since no attempt was even made with the agent to negotiate the alteration or deletion of the language that is complained of in the first place. (As for the name of the agent not being mentioned, there was certainly enough information given, coupled with copies of the contract being emailed out, that it had to understood it was only a matter of time before the name would work its way into the thread. Whether that was intentional or not is not for me to decide.) Two, the language being complained about is hardly atypical for contracts with outfitters and agents . . . as we have seen with Frank's itty bitty contract. So we single out and condemn this agent as an industry pariah for contractual language that is not particularly uncommon. Is the provision appropriate and what sort of limitation of liability and indemnity would be appropriate in these circumstances . . . that may be a debate worth having, but any hint that this agent is the only agent with such releases and indemnities and is therefore in some way deserving of unique condemnation is just wrong.

As for not wanting the contract to be submitted for the views of the AR intelligentsia, one does not have to hang around here long to understand how quickly such a thread will degenerate . . . as it did here. We have folks that refuse to post hunt reports for goodness sake because keyboard experts want to tear the reports to pieces and turn a memorable experience into a regrettable nightmare. I completely understand his reticence to be singled out for a proctological exam, particularly when he is hardly the only outfitter or agent using provisions akin to that being complained of.

The first part is true.....the second part is a slam dunk home run!!!

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by drummondlindsey:

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:

This year I will be in Zimbabwe, at least one hunt in the Lower 48 and maybe two, and Alaska (of course). 2017 I will be in the States for three or four hunts as well as Zimbabwe, South Africa and (I hope) Tanzania).

If the other outfitters and agents won't come and play, maybe you could post the agreements for these hunts for the collective evaluation of the group.

My contract in its entirety.....



Any questions?

Maybe I'm an idiot for not having one but I have never had a problem doing handshake deals

Not an idiot unless and until there is a problem . . . then yes, not having a contract is idiotic. Car insurance is also a waste of money . . . unless and until there is an accident.

I totally disagree

I will take a handshake agreement over Mark Young form contract any day. At least with a handshake agreement you are not signing away tort liabilities and in the US that is worth a something.

And the hunt Cal was negotiating was a US hunt with a real legal system and liability rules.

Mike

You should check with Drummond and see if he has any openings.

quote:

As for not wanting the contract to be submitted for the views of the AR intelligentsia, one does not have to hang around here long to understand how quickly such a thread will degenerate . . . as it did here. We have folks that refuse to post hunt reports for goodness sake because keyboard experts want to tear the reports to pieces and turn a memorable experience into a regrettable nightmare. I completely understand his reticence to be singled out for a proctological exam, particularly when he is hardly the only outfitter or agent using provisions akin to that being complained of.

And that right there explains why so many members have stopped participating on the site.

Mike:
Thanks for your post and explanation. While I may disagree, it is a far better approach than the veiled sarcasm that is beneath a man such as you are.
I have never singed nor seen a contract as offered to me by Mark--hence my post. I have signed dozens of hunt agreements whereby the client and the outfitter/PH have some trust in each other. An acceptable one is in my initial post.
It would be interesting to see what is acceptable to you as you have altered 100% of contracts offered to you and (finally) admitted you would not have signed Mark's either. I don't have a legal mind. Maybe that's a good thing or a bad thing.
Cheers,
Cal

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
You should check with Drummond and see if he has any openings.

He would be someone I would talk to if I was interested in hunting Mule Deer.

And a handshake works fine with me as I rather hand shake deal with an honest man than have a written contract with A dishonest man. Cause under American rules I am going to have to spend $$ on legal fees to enforce a contract with a dishonest man. Besides my hunting is low dollar as I just don't stay up at night wanting to shoot elephants or sheep or wild lions. If I was doing a written contract I would have a whole choice of law issue on where the contract would be enforced and my measly hunting would not qualify for federal courts.

So I will have no problem taking the risk with a handshake deal from AR members who advertise hunts and who are a known quantity on AR. Same way as I have no problem buying guns on classified section and sending a check to members and letting it clear before they ship the guns.

For all the bitching about AR being a tough place - its sorts out honest members really well.


Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

For all the bitching about AR being a tough place - its sorts out honest members really well.

Sometimes. I have heard stories though about how some hunters on AR have treated other hunters on AR in terms of candor and deceit that make me wonder about that statement and whether it is necessarily correct.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
You should check with Drummond and see if he has any openings.

Works for me.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
A number of outfitters and agents that advertise hunts on the forum commented on this thread, perhaps in the interest of transparency and considering that these contracts are apparently everyone's business, having weighed in on the thread already they will post copies of their contracts for review? After all, we are simply trying to advance the understanding of what to expect in booking contracts.

I suspect contracts are written to extreme to protect themselves against the odd customer who is out to make a killing??

As I mentioned earlier, TGT is one of better hunting outfits, and their contract is much worse than Mark's contract.

And as I have also mentioned, they do go out of their way to help clients, instead of enforcing the contract to the letter.

Mark has also mentioned that he takes each individual case on its own merits, and deals with it accordingly.

Isn't this what happens in other fields too?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

For all the bitching about AR being a tough place - its sorts out honest members really well.

Sometimes. I have heard stories though about how some hunters on AR have treated other hunters on AR in terms of candor and deceit that make me wonder about that statement and whether it is necessarily correct.

Diverging opinions make a market - you can choose not to participate in markets we have on ar (hunts offered, guns and other stuff for sale). I have been very happy buying guns, optics, gear and stuff on AR.

All deals have been done via an electronic handshake and I have sent my checks and received products that were as advertised. My primary sorting mechanism has been ar members reputation and the tough place it is.

Being a licensed but non practice lawyer I get the whole written contract thing but at the same time I get the economic fact that for sub $10k purchases contracts are not worth my time cause enforcing will cost me the same.

And for me at the end of the day life is just too short to view every person as dishonest and every private seller as someone out to get me.

Mike

quote:

Mark has also mentioned that he takes each individual case on its own merits, and deals with it accordingly.

That's a good thing. However the other side is he can make the choice to screw me. Of course, any agent can do so. There difference here is I have signed away my rights should Mark decide (on an individual case) to send me packing. I have signed away any and all recourse I have. Now, I have his word he would not do so, but his word is out of the contract which, as stated therein, is 100% of the agreement--nothing else can be added to it, including "trust me" and "I won't screw you." If those phrases were to hold any water, maybe they should have not been absent from the contract(?).

I enjoy this discussion and AR in general. Even though our tempers get hot at times, it is a pleasure chatting with you all.
Cal

quote:

And for me at the end of the day life is just too short to view every person as dishonest and every private seller as someone

All I am suggesting is that appearances can be deceptive with some folks. I have heard stories about some AR members and how they have conducted themselves relative to other AR members in hunting situations that I find far more reprehensible than a one-sided contractual provision in a minimimal return agency contract. Things are not always as they seem, nothing surprising in that statement.

I, too, have bought many items on AR. Often the item and my check pass in the mail. I have not been screwed nor have I screwed anyone. (See 458 bullets for sale in the classifieds for an example). I expect my hunts to be the same. I would not buy anything on AR's classifieds if I had to sign a disclaimer that if the seller screwed me I could not seek recourse. Or, if the seller refused to business with me if I wanted to go to the AR members to check out his business practices.
I know I (we) are beating a dead horse here. It's nearly 8:30 pm here, 4 more hours of good daylight remaining, so it's off to shoot my .600 a bit and practice for my upcoming Zim hunt (which I didn't sign a contract for).
Cheers, mates. You're all the best.
Cal

Heading for 10 pages......

I again say I learned something on here about blindly signing a contract. It's hard for us non-lawyers to figure this stuff out.

If it's a detailed contract then alter it to your liking. If there's no contract beware because you aren't protected. Geez!! Enough to make your head spin.

Then we have the debate over the definition of "accusation". I'm waiting for Bill Clinton to log on and define the meaning of "is" for us.

Known Cal for a while now. He's not afraid to offer help, answer a question, or ask a question, but he doesn't handle being told not to do something he has every right to do such as ask a question on AR.

We have a member or two reading Cal's intent for starting this thread in the tea leaves of their psychic ability.

Then of course we have the "why nobody will post hunt reports anymore". Not sure why I've never felt criticized or condemned on my hunt reports? Just lucky I guess. Hell, on my Elephant report I offered a Mea Culpa on how I felt I didn't live up my anticipated expectation on how the Elephant would die and it bothered me. In that same hunt report I was told......

quote:

Originally posted by nhoro:

Drop the apologies regarding the ele's death: "I apologized. All my planning, imagery, and practice meant little once the lead flew". Your planning and practice paid off perfectly. According to your report, you placed a perfect second shot and also had the presence of mind and know-how to break the hip socket and anchor the animal. Very few first-time ele hunters can do this. If you still need reassurance, watch the DVD "Boddington on Elephant". Out of all the hunts shown, count how many perfect first-shot brain hits there are. Count how many Craig makes (if memory serves me right - none). Then count how many clients are capable of finishing what they started unassisted.

You knew what to do, and did it. You should quit apologizing and be proud of what you accomplished.

Made me realize what he said was true. Certainly helped me reconcile personally that I didn't totally screw the pooch on what will likely be my one and only Elephant hunt.

I once bought a (non-blazer) rifle from Biebs on the classifieds for $4,500. I called him to ask if a personal check is fine and Jon said, "Sure, BTW the rifle is already on the way". We didn't sign a contract.

AR is very lightly moderated and I appreciate that. I had hunt reports edited without my permission on another forum where I posted the report at the request of an AR member posting on both. I will never do that again. Might have been a small thing for someone else but it wasn't for me. Perhaps when Cal was told not to seek the counsel of AR he felt somewhat as I did when I was edited.

Guys, if you don't realize it we are a large sometimes dysfunctional family. Everybody has a family member they maybe wish to avoid but in the end we are still family.

For the most part family takes care of each other.

Here's an excellent example.

And even a better one since the guy had the balls to come back with a pseudonym.

An example of Cal's integrity.

So again, thanks Cal for the thread and thanks Mike for the contract education, even though my head is still spinning.

Cheers
Jim

Well, I had made up my mind to stay out of this one further. However, there is an issue that has not been brought up in the discussions that is of monumental importance. This is Article 6 Force Majeure.

Here is the section from the contract:

6. FORCE MAJEURE.

6.1 “Force Majeure” means, in relation to the Company and the Outfitter/Safari Operator, any circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the Company or the Outfitter/Safari Operator (including, but without limitation, acts of God, explosion, flood tempest, fire, accident, war or threat of war, terrorist attacks, sabotage, insurrection, civil disturbance, unrest, requisition, sickness, quarantine, government intervention or hindrance of any kind, weather conditions or other untold occurrences). For purposes of this Agreement with you, A Force Majeure event may also include a situation where government concessions for Trips once made available to the Company or the Outfitter/Safari Operator are no longer made available to the Company or the Outfitter/Safari Operator or are significantly restricted.

6.2 Neither the Company nor the Outfitter/Safari Operator shall not be deemed to be in breach of this Agreement, or otherwise be liable to you, because of delay in performance, of by nonperformance of any of its obligations hereunder to the extent that any such delay or non- performance is due to any Force Majeure.

6.3 If the Company and/or the Outfitter/Safari Operator is affected by Force Majeure it shall be entitled to and may in its sole and absolute discretion, vary or cancel any itinerary or arrangement in relation to the Trip. Payment of any refund by the Company and/or Outfitter/Safari Operator to you as a result of the non-performance of any of the Outfitter/Safari Operator’s nonperformance of any of its obligation hereunder shall remain in its sole and absolute discretion. In all cases, the Company shall be entitled to deduct from any possible refund recoverable, the reasonable actual and potential costs to the Company and/or Outfitter/Safari Operation.

6.4 In all circumstances where a Force Majeure event has occurred, once the Company and/or Outfitter/Safari Operator have investigated the prevailing situation, as it deems fit, it shall remain in the Outfitter/Safari Operator’s sole and absolute discretion whether to proceed with your Trip. If, after having made all reasonable and proper inquiries, the Outfitter/Safari Operator is of the opinion that your Trip may proceed, and you choose to cancel your Trip, no refund will be payable to you and the provisions of Section 2.1 (iii) shall apply.

page7image24680.png page7image24840.png page7image25000.png page7image25160.png page7image25320.png page7image25480.png page7image25640.png page7image25800.png page7image25960.png
7

6.5. As to international Trips, without limiting the other provisions of this Section 6, you acknowledge and agree that you are aware that travel warnings and advisories are issued on occasion for the country in which your Trip is booked. You further acknowledge and agree that the issuance of a travel warning or advisory does not give rise to an automatic right of cancellation for you. If a travel warning or advisory is issued prior to the start of your Trip or during you Trip, the Company and the Outfitter/Safari Operator will investigate the situation giving rise to the warning or advisory and will make a determination as to whether to proceed with your Trip consistent with Paragraph 6.4 above. If, after having made all reasonable and proper inquiries, the Outfitter/Safari Operator are of the opinion that your Trip may proceed, and you choose to cancel your Trip, no refund will be payable to you and the provisions of Paragraph 2.1(iii) shall apply.

6.6. Because a Force Majeure event constitutes a Section 2.1(iii) cancellation fee at all times, the Company strongly recommends that Client purchase Trip Cancellation insurance.

------------------------------------------------

Read this one REAL carefully especially 6.6. Under this section of the contract, one could find themselves on the hook for the cost of a hunt that CANNOT be conducted.

Make your own conclusions.

In case of flood, fire, earthquake, nuclear war, ISIS taking over the hunt block, etc., Mark will not refund anything and, depending of the dates of FM, the client may actually owe the balance of the hunt (which can't be conducted).

This is so GD one sided! Check out the dates of the money due for deposits. If not paid on the exact date, the hunt is forfeited and no refunds are due.

Should the entire contract be posted here for gents so see what parts are acceptable or not?
The more I read, the more disgusted I am and definitely did the right thing to hunt elsewhere.
Cal

PS. So, 6.1, if the government closes the hunt block, I still pay for the hunt and it is Mark's sole and absolute discretion to refund some or none of the money(?)--and I may owe him more!!!!

This is like the "letter of the law" that allowed Bushwack to keep the deposit of a dying man.
Cal

Here is some verbiage from another contract.

"Further, Client agrees never to institute or cause to be instituted any lawsuit or other form of action or proceeding of any kind or nature whatsoever against XXXXX based upon any agreement, promise, obligation, damage or liabilities of any nature whatsoever related in any way to or arising out of the hunt."

The point is that while some would like to portray the contract language on this thread as being atypical, beyond the pale and an affront to civilized people everywhere . . . the language is not dissimilar from that used in many other comparable agreements. Does that make it right that such provisions exist and are used? That is debatable. But to single out one agent and one contract, as was done here, for scorn is simply wrong. My guess is that we are not likely to see a rush of outfitters and agents coming on this thread to post their contracts . . . .

quote:

an affront to civilized people everywhere

Hi Mike:

For years I've enjoyed your factual posts. The sarcasm IMHO takes away from your credibility.

I've only taken 21 over seas hunts and have never signed anything over about one page. From my perspective this contract goes way over the limit in the power it gives Mark. It seems most here fell the same way and you, too, would have altered it.

Again, to repeat, what is the most troublesome to you: my posting, the length of the contract, the one sided nature of the contract, the clients that file suit, or the lawyers that make the suit happen?

Cal

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Here is some verbiage from another contract.

"Further, Client agrees never to institute or cause to be instituted any lawsuit or other form of action or proceeding of any kind or nature whatsoever against XXXXX based upon any agreement, promise, obligation, damage or liabilities of any nature whatsoever related in any way to or arising out of the hunt."

Mike, Thanks for posting that. I'm seriously still trying to learn what is "acceptable". Is this a contract you actually signed or did you alter this one as well?

Seriously Cal, I have answered that question at least three times already. I will try once more. I think the issue of what should or should not be in contracts used by agents and outfitters, what is reasonable and what is unreasonable, is absolutely an appropriate conversation to have. I think raising that issue by dragging one contract and one agent through the dirt does a disservice to the agent and the issue frankly. But I appreciate that is the AR way. For example, we much prefer to ridicule a specific person's lion trophy as opposed to discussing the issue of appropriately aged lions generically.

Oh, and by the way, if you think signing a one page contract (twenty one times as I appreciate) is the key, you need to think again. Frank's itty bitty contract basically says the same thing the longer contract says. Surely you can appreciate that the substance is more important than the length.

I'm not sure there were posts here calling out the agent, I know I wasn't. I don't know M Young from Adam, so I can't possibly state anything factual about him personally,as it would only be an accusation. I do know the contract he used in this instance was a joke though.

Just an observation, nothing more.

Since 1998 when I started my Javelina hunting guide service in Pecos County Texas up thru this year and the hunts my boss does for Deer and Feral Hogs in north Texas, the ONLY thing our clients sign or have signed over the years, is a one page Release Of Liability statement. On the Javelina hunts, it was two pages. One for me and one the rancher required.

I have been told numerous times over the years that neither document was worth the paper they were written on.

From my limited experience, you have to try and be a decent judge of character and decide whether or not you are willing to book a client based on your correspondence with them while trying to set up the hunt.

Again, that is just an observation.

quote:

"Further, Client agrees never to institute or cause to be instituted any lawsuit or other form of action or proceeding of any kind or nature whatsoever against XXXXX based upon any agreement, promise, obligation, damage or liabilities of any nature whatsoever related in any way to or arising out of the hunt."

Attorneys: does putting your signature below this line stop you from initiating legal action if a law was broken by the agent or outfitter?

I would say no. Doctors are sued all the time for "bad outcomes" that are not "malpractice" in any sense of the word. Docs well know they don't have to do anything wrong to be sued.

quote:

Originally posted by Norton:

quote:

"Further, Client agrees never to institute or cause to be instituted any lawsuit or other form of action or proceeding of any kind or nature whatsoever against XXXXX based upon any agreement, promise, obligation, damage or liabilities of any nature whatsoever related in any way to or arising out of the hunt."

Attorneys: does putting your signature below this line stop you from initiating legal action if a law was broken by the agent or outfitter?

I would say no. Doctors are sued all the time for "bad outcomes" that are not "malpractice" in any sense of the word. Docs well know they don't have to do anything wrong to be sued.

Ultimately, we all lose something.

Except the lawyers, who benefit whatever happens.

Stirr the tar

Feathers are on the way

quote:

Originally posted by ted thorn:
Stirr the tar

Feathers are on the way

If you mean for attorneys......count me in!

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

Except the lawyers, who benefit whatever happens.

Same as Bookies and Brokers.

the ONLY way to end an argument with a lawyer.

Give him...



and tell him...

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

Except the lawyers, who benefit whatever happens.

Gotta love a good business model.

Steve that works with wives/girl friends also!

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
In case of flood, fire, earthquake, nuclear war, ISIS taking over the hunt block, etc., Mark will not refund anything and, depending of the dates of FM, the client may actually owe the balance of the hunt (which can't be conducted).

This is so GD one sided! Check out the dates of the money due for deposits. If not paid on the exact date, the hunt is forfeited and no refunds are due.

Should the entire contract be posted here for gents so see what parts are acceptable or not?
The more I read, the more disgusted I am and definitely did the right thing to hunt elsewhere.
Cal

PS. So, 6.1, if the government closes the hunt block, I still pay for the hunt and it is Mark's sole and absolute discretion to refund some or none of the money(?)--and I may owe him more!!!!

Please post the entire contract.

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
In case of flood, fire, earthquake, nuclear war, ISIS taking over the hunt block, etc., Mark will not refund anything and, depending of the dates of FM, the client may actually owe the balance of the hunt (which can't be conducted).

This is so GD one sided! Check out the dates of the money due for deposits. If not paid on the exact date, the hunt is forfeited and no refunds are due.

Should the entire contract be posted here for gents so see what parts are acceptable or not?
The more I read, the more disgusted I am and definitely did the right thing to hunt elsewhere.
Cal

PS. So, 6.1, if the government closes the hunt block, I still pay for the hunt and it is Mark's sole and absolute discretion to refund some or none of the money(?)--and I may owe him more!!!!

Please post the entire contract.

Mike

Yes, by all means . . . gotta make sure the coyotes have plenty to eat.

quote:

Originally posted by Crazyhorseconsulting:
Steve that works with wives/girl friends also!

So true Randall.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

Yes, by all means . . . gotta make sure the coyotes have plenty to eat.

A fox may steal your hens, Sir,
A whore your health and pence, Sir,
Your daughter rob your chest, Sir,
Your wife may steal your rest, Sir,
A thief your goods and plate.
But this is all but picking,
With rest, pence, chest and chicken;
It ever was decreed, Sir,
If lawyer's hand is fee'd, Sir,
He steals your whole estate.

- John Gay (1685-1732), English dramatist. Peachum, in The Beggar's Opera, act 1, sc. 9, Air 11.

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by Beretta682E:

quote:

Originally posted by cal pappas:
In case of flood, fire, earthquake, nuclear war, ISIS taking over the hunt block, etc., Mark will not refund anything and, depending of the dates of FM, the client may actually owe the balance of the hunt (which can't be conducted).

This is so GD one sided! Check out the dates of the money due for deposits. If not paid on the exact date, the hunt is forfeited and no refunds are due.

Should the entire contract be posted here for gents so see what parts are acceptable or not?
The more I read, the more disgusted I am and definitely did the right thing to hunt elsewhere.
Cal

PS. So, 6.1, if the government closes the hunt block, I still pay for the hunt and it is Mark's sole and absolute discretion to refund some or none of the money(?)--and I may owe him more!!!!

Please post the entire contract.

Mike

Yes, by all means . . . gotta make sure the coyotes have plenty to eat.

Us handshake agreement guys may learn all the stuff we are not giving up

Besides I can send it to my lawyer and ask how much it would cost to rewrite the contract. That is a cost that should be added on top of the hunt costs.

Mike

I am sure you will find that quite entertaining.

Maybe we should come up with some fresh meat to feed the pack? We could start a thread featuring examples of reprehensible hunter-to-hunter conduct. I am sure that would be entertaining as well . . . at least for some.