Hi I'm launching a new site which is likely to have more legal correspondence than others I've operated. Must I have a fax? I get the impression that's a popular method for legal comms. I hate fax machines. Is use of email sufficient and or are there some benefits of having fax for legal comms? Thanks
In many countries a signed faxed document is considered legal. It is becoming accepted that emailed documents are legally binding too, but the biggest problem with Email is privacy. Your email can be intercepted at any point during its transmission over the various routers, even if that interception is entirely benign. As a hosting company we can read any email being sent or received by our clients, and we can even archive all their correspondence - in and out - without their knowledge if we were minded to (not that we do). I wouldn't like to think that my priviledged information was so easily viewed by a third party without my consent. For all that it costs for a cheap fax machine you're better off having one than not so the option is available.
There are online services that allow you to receive faxes in a virtual phone number and they deliver that information to your email. Godaddy has one of these services, but there are many others, which save you from the hassle of a regular fax machine. For legal purposes having fax as a contact method is necessary IMHO.
It's sounding like more of a must. I wasn't aware of the privacy and legal standing of faxes. Thanks for the replies.
If fax is a must then instead of buying a fax machine and getting a separate fax line, you can save $ by getting an online fax service. We use Onesuite fax and its cheap and accessible anywhere as long as you have internet access. Your business can receive and send fax 24 hours a day.
I certainly do not think having a fax machine is a must. Not even sure what kind of "legal correspondence" you are worried about but I am aware of no legal requirement that you own a fax in the United States to deal with legal correspondence. It doesn't even make sense that you would need one - why do you even think it is necessary?
Some companies still insist of sending their documents through fax and some insist of receiving through fax too.
The iphone does have apps to scan docs, print, and send back via email as with signature/date. I have been using this for legal docs in some situations.
Fax is usually insisted upon since (a) traditional to many, (b) there is a confirmation of sending since the phone company has a record of the call in addition to the time stamps, (c) it's quicker and cheaper than certified mail and the sender gets a confirmation from the recipient's fax machine of receipt.
1. Who cares if the phone company has a record of a call? It is evidence of nothing other than the line was used. Try proving something by saying, "hey it was really faxed, look, my phone line shows a call at the time I say I faxed". It is a laughable proposition. 2. How do you get "confirmation from the recipient's fax machine"? That is a neat trick. Most machines print out a confirmation that they have sent a fax successfully, I have not seen one that was able to confirm receipt of a fax on the by the recipient. Anyway, as fun as this is, the answer is really simple: If you want a fax, get one. If you don't want one, don't get one. There is no legal requirement that you have a fax.
It's not laughable at all. Attorneys are paranoid by nature and prefer as much proof as possible, even to the point of the absolute remote (which this is and I have never seen come into play, mostly mental assurance fwiw.) But for the most part, the majority of time people aren't going to fake sending notice in these situations by using their fax to call someone else's fax just for the sake of saying a call came in. I didn't say there was a legal requirement. I was just answering the question as to why it is so popular. Much of this is personal preference and the way people have done business (an older generation, keep in mind.) The sender has a confirmation. The recipient is also able to confirm a fax was received since virtually every fax machine has a transmission list that can be printed of faxes sent, failure and success. Personally, if there is something important that requires notice, I'll send it in email and USPS with certification or some other method that shows proof of delivery, end of story.
Anything that requires notice in a particular manner will state how you must give notice. If a particular contract requires notice sent to be sent in writing to a fax - then send it that way. If they do not specify how you must give notice of something then give notice however you feel most comfortable. The OP was asking about needing a fax to receive legal documents. Are you aware of any reason someone needs to have a fax in anticipation of some unknown legal documents that will arrive only by fax? I'm not.
Agree with you for the most part. I usually have two methods if it's important notice, e.g. via email and once via hard copy via fax or certified mail method. Substance over form mostly. Difficult for one party to complain "we received notice and acknowledged but now will dispute the contract because you sent the notice Fedex and we didn't receive the fax." Doesn't mean I'll choose not to fax if it says fax. The benefit of having a fax is just that people of a certain generation have one. It's easy for them. Scanning, cropping, attaching, emailing is not. Many older lawyers, of which there are many, prefer real paper and fax. Just the facts...
Every lawyer I know, including those in their 70s, works with email attachments and sends scans and pdfs of documents. I have received two different sets of legal pleadings in the last week and all were sent via email to review. p.s. Most of the time it is not the lawyer personally doing the scanning and cropping. Maybe small town lawyers are still working the fax machine, but like the rest of the world, lawyers for the most part have moved on. p.s.s. Don't forget its much easier to send a 290 page set of documents via pdf than via fax anyway.
Glad that you work with them that way. The economy is very bad, especially for lawyers. In a big or mid sized firm I'd say you're right. If you go to many small firms, e.g. 1-5 attorneys, they don't have the staff or updated equipment. Fax and hardcopy, makes their life easier. For 300 page pleadings it's another story as usually these documents are already digitized. Notice provisions are something different altogether. It has nothing to do with convenience of sending large documents but more of a confirmation of receipt. Truth is that many of the notice provisions are probably not updated, simple as that. Most of my modern contracts don't rely on email only for notice. It's just not sufficiently reliable.
I personally like efax for sending/receiving. When I signed up, they allowed me to receive 25 pages for free. That took care of all of the faxes I received that year. None of my clients insisted I fax back the info; I signed the fax documents, scanned them to my PC, and sent them back via e-mail.
I have a similar service. It works well. I have my fax machine as a "just in case" but it's really not needed any more. Just one thought - when you send a fax with a third party service they will confirm the other party received it. On many fax machines it will show the page sent. Sure it's not absolute proof but, as I said earlier, lawyers have that extra assurance that there is some credible record of the effort was made, the machine they have works reliably, it won't get lost in the spam filter. There is no requirement of a fax at all. You can send notice however the parties prefer it to be sent. I just offered reasons why fax may still be used which is usually (a) an older contract that was copied, (b) one of the parties prefers to receive faxes and feels more confident they will be delivered and received with a confirmation of sorts. There is generally no confirmation that your recipient received or read an email.