• Registered: 04-01-2009
  • Posts: 4

Topic: Contracts ..... Real or Memorex??

To create a binding contract their must be an offer, acceptance and consideration.  The offer came from Alabama's Legislature in 1989 as set out in Title 16 Section 33C-1.  By purchasing PACTs responsible Alabama parents accepted the offer of the Alabama Legislature to plan for Alabama's future.  When these PACTs were purchased the price constituted consideration for the contract.  Alabama's Legislature by entering into these contracts guaranteed future college students who hold these contracts an education on behalf of all Alabamians.  Alabama as a whole supported this program at its inception and Alabamians respect the Rule of Law.  Alabama cannot now breach its contracts at the behest of a few!

  • From: Lanett, Alabama
  • Registered: 03-27-2009
  • Posts: 122

Re: Contracts ..... Real or Memorex??

Elisa,

Do you have a PDF or at least a link to the 1989 documents?  I would love to read them and I am sure others would also.

Well said above!

Richard Huckaby
Cofounder, SaveAlabamaPact.com
2X CONTRACT holder

Einstein once said, 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'

tenrocdoc's Website

  • Registered: 04-01-2009
  • Posts: 4

Re: Contracts ..... Real or Memorex??

Rick,

Contact me at esrivesllc@bellsouth.net

  • Registered: 04-01-2009
  • Posts: 4

Re: Contracts ..... Real or Memorex??

The Master PACTs are on the state treasurer's website...  Before 1995 the Master PACT states that purchase of a contract quarantees tuition and fees for qualified beneficiaries! Beginning in 1995 the Master PACT states that purchase of a contract provides tuition and fees for qualified beneficiaries. In 2003 the PACT TRUST had sufficient funds to cover 90% of its projected liabilities! Now?

  • Registered: 09-21-2009
  • Posts: 1

Re: Contracts ..... Real or Memorex??

The only question in my mind with the contract is whether the contract is "enforceable".  If litigation were to result from this situation, I think the State would argue they enjoy soverign immunity from litigation (i.e. they are the government and can't be sued).

However, based on my research, the State cannot argue this because the State effectively waived their soverign immunity when they agreed to adhere with the Internal Revenue Code in establishing the PACT.  So, they "must" adhere to federal regulations.

So, I agree with you, a contract does exist.  I would like to add - it is also enforceable. 

We will get our money one way or the other.  I do think we should try the diplomatic way first.  By going the diplomatic route, maybe we will benefit from the PACT within the next year.  Otherwise the litigation route may take years and years.