A. WHY IS THERE NO CONSIDERATION FOR A SECOND AGREEMENT?

B. HOW CAN UCC 1-207 HELP THE FIRM?

You work in the accounting department of the Walter Accounting Firm (the Firm). Your superior, Robert Walter, has given you an assignment to find out from the legal department how to deal with a legal matter regarding a former client, Jay Lemon. After you consult with the legal department, you are to draft a business memorandum addressed to your superior, Robert Walter, explaining the information and the options given to you by the legal department. Your superior also tells you that Ms. Lemons case is not unique and that she is just one of many clients who pose an identical or similar problem for the Firm. Your superior informs you that the former client, Jay Lemon, entered a written and signed contract with the Firm on January 1, 2021 under which Ms. Lemon agreed to pay the Firm. $10,000 for accounting services. The accounting services that Ms. Lemon contracted for were completed on March 1, 2021. Nevertheless, Ms. Lemon has informed the Firm that, in her opinion, the accountant that handled her account did not do a good job. As a result, she does not feel that she should pay the Firm the $10,000 as per the contract terms. She has been calling the office to argue about this matter for the past three weeks. Now, she claims that she is willing to send a check for $5000 (the amount that she thinks the services were worth) as full payment for the accounting services.

**THIS IS NOT THE ANSWER I AM LOOKING FOR**

The firm has the right to claim the balance amount from Mr. Anderson because the Firm is entitled to recover the amount. Mr. Anderson did not negotiate with the firm before making the payment, thus, it cannot be considered settlement or Accord and Satisfaction under contract law. As per the given facts, if Ms. Jay Lemon sends $5,000 to the officer without any bargaining with the firm and the firm accepts that payment and deposits the check in its account then the firm would be able to sue Ms. Jay Lemon later for the balance of $10,000. As per the contract law, there is a legal term called "Accord and Satisfaction", this applied when parties trying to solve a claim in which the parties to the contract agree on new terms which can be less stringent than the ones in the original contract. In this situation, the claiming party usually receives less than what is owed to settle the claim. The requirements for accord and satisfaction are a. the proper subject matter b. competent parties c. meeting of the minds of the parties d. adequate consideration It is the method of discharging a claim by the settlement of claim and performing the new agreement. A new contract is substituted for an old contract but "Accord and Satisfaction" requires that consideration must be bargained for in the original contract. It has two elements: a. there must be bargained for exchange between the parties, b. what is bargained for must have legal value. As we can see that Ms. Jay Lemon did not negotiate with the firm, gives the right to the firm to claim its balance amount from Ms. Jay Lemon because this transaction cannot be considered "Accord and Satisfaction" under the contract laws as bargaining is the necessary elements that need to be there in settlement of claims. This is the "Unsecured debt" is involved in this situation because the firm has no collateral of Ms. Jay Lemon. This can be risky for the firm because the firm may not be able to recover the balance amount from Ms. Jay Lemon as he did not pledge any specific assets as security to the firm. The firm has only option i.e. to file a lawsuit against Ms. Jay Lemon to claim the balance amount for the service the firm provided to her. The laws regarding the settlement of "Unsecured debt" is that the party made one time payment towards an existing balance in return for the forgiveness of the remaining debt. Thus, Ms. Jay Lemon needs a significant amount of cash at one time to settle her debt by negotiating with the Firm. The law says that if both the parties agreed on one amount for the services provides and the other party refused to pay in full then it is considered a breach of contract and the non-breaching party is entitled to file a lawsuit against the breaching party to recover the amount and claim damages for breach of contract. However, if Ms. Jay Lemon negotiated with the firm, and both the parties agreed on a new amount exchange of old amount then it would be considered "Accord and Satisfaction" this law discharge a claim in which the parties agree to give and accept different performance which is usually less than what is required or owed. Therefore, the firm has the right to claim the balance amount from Ms. Jay Lemon because the Firm is entitled to recover the amount. Ms. Anderson did not negotiate with the firm before making the payment, thus, it cannot be considered settlement or Accord and Satisfaction under contract law. However, I would advise the firm that the firm can now negotiate with Ms. Jay Lemon for the balance of $10,000 and allow Ms. Jay Lemon to make a one-time payment for settlement of her debt. The firm has the right to claim the balance amount from Mr. Anderson because the Firm is entitled to recover the amount. Mr. Anderson did not negotiate with the firm before making the payment, thus, it cannot be considered settlement or Accord and Satisfaction under contract law. As per the given facts, if Ms. Jay Lemon sends $5,000 to the officer without any bargaining with the firm and the firm accepts that payment and deposits the check in its account then the firm would be able to sue Ms. Jay Lemon later for the balance of $10,000. As per the contract law, there is a legal term called "Accord and Satisfaction", this applied when parties trying to solve a claim in which the parties to the contract agree on new terms which can be less stringent than the ones in the original contract. In this situation, the claiming party usually receives less than what is owed to settle the claim. The requirements for accord and satisfaction are a. the proper subject matter b. competent parties c. meeting of the minds of the parties d. adequate consideration It is the method of discharging a claim by the settlement of claim and performing the new agreement. A new contract is substituted for an old contract but "Accord and Satisfaction" requires that consideration must be bargained for in the original contract. It has two elements: a. there must be bargained for exchange between the parties, b. what is bargained for must have legal value. As we can see that Ms. Jay Lemon did not negotiate with the firm, gives the right to the firm to claim its balance amount from Ms. Jay Lemon because this transaction cannot be considered "Accord and Satisfaction" under the contract laws as bargaining is the necessary elements that need to be there in settlement of claims. This is the "Unsecured debt" is involved in this situation because the firm has no collateral of Ms. Jay Lemon. This can be risky for the firm because the firm may not be able to recover the balance amount from Ms. Jay Lemon as he did not pledge any specific assets as security to the firm. The firm has only option i.e. to file a lawsuit against Ms. Jay Lemon to claim the balance amount for the service the firm provided to her. The laws regarding the settlement of "Unsecured debt" is that the party made one time payment towards an existing balance in return for the forgiveness of the remaining debt. Thus, Ms. Jay Lemon needs a significant amount of cash at one time to settle her debt by negotiating with the Firm. The law says that if both the parties agreed on one amount for the services provides and the other party refused to pay in full then it is considered a breach of contract and the non-breaching party is entitled to file a lawsuit against the breaching party to recover the amount and claim damages for breach of contract. However, if Ms. Jay Lemon negotiated with the firm, and both the parties agreed on a new amount exchange of old amount then it would be considered "Accord and Satisfaction" this law discharge a claim in which the parties agree to give and accept different performance which is usually less than what is required or owed. Therefore, the firm has the right to claim the balance amount from Ms. Jay Lemon because the Firm is entitled to recover the amount. Ms. Anderson did not negotiate with the firm before making the payment, thus, it cannot be considered settlement or Accord and Satisfaction under contract law. However, I would advise the firm that the firm can now negotiate with Ms. Jay Lemon for the balance of $10,000 and allow Ms. Jay Lemon to make a one-time payment for settlement of her debt