Quote:
|
If there is consideration and it is refused, then the debt is void, that is BASIC contract law.
|
I think that you, perhaps, misunderstand the concept of consideration. Consideration is an element of the formation of a contract, not the form of payment itself.
As for refusal of payment making the debt void, not only is that not "basic contract law", it doesn't even seem to be part of the more sophisticated deails of contract law. Under the UCC, and before the UCC under the common law of business practices, unless explicitly specified otherwise in the agreement, creditors/vendors could insist on payment in legal tender and reject any other forms of payment, such as merchandise, checks and other promises of future payment.
A refusal of an actual tendering of legal tender of the full amount -- such as might be justified in the creditor's mind if, for example, it was made in an hour or place where the money or he might not be safe from robbers -- does not erase the debt. It merely freezes whatever interest or late penalties have accrued to that moment, although these may start mounting again if the debtor thereafter refuses to part with the money at a more appropriate time and place.
If the creditor/vendor accepts a check, it constitutes payment only if the check does not bounce. If he accepts a promissory note or some other kind of promise of future payment, then the original debt is displaced by the debt created by the promissory note - so non-payment means a lawsuit on the promissory note rather than on the original transaction.
I hope this makes things clear for you.