Owner claims intoxication after trade

[Fantasy GM]

Last week, I made a nice trade in my fantasy baseball league that I also commish. It was a deal the other owner and I had been discussing, but we needed to establish specifics before formally accepting the trade (draft picks being moved, etc). Early in the week, we were at a local bar where he bartends. We discussed the specifics and had a deal in place; he wanted to talk about the trade so we stepped outside for a few moments. I sent him a note later that night writing out the players and picks being moved in the deal and asked if he approved it. He wrote back saying he approved.

At this point, I make the trade official. It goes through the 2-day voting window successfully and the trade is league-approved.

The following day, my friend comes over and says he doesn't feel like doing the trade anymore, he wants more in return. I told him that after I received his agreement confirmation, I submitted the trade and it had been league-approved the day before; it's too late. He then says he was drunk so the trade is no good. I explained:
-While he was bartending, he did not appear drunk (was coherent, aware of what was going on).
-He agreed to the trade twice; verbally and in writing. I need written confirmation for all trades in our league.
-I would not have talked trade with him if it was visible he was influenced. He was coherent and seemed normal.

So, what's the general policy with these things - trades where an owner claims he is drunk or intoxicated? He is cool about the deal now, it's not all that lopsided (if at all). Our trade has been processed. Just curious moving forward.

[pjalst]

Was he actually on duty as a Bartender when you met with him at the bar? If so, most bars have strong policies against employees drinking while on duty. He should lose this argument based of iresponsiility. It sounds like you're covered as far proof goes. Your buddy may be pissed if the trade goes through, but he'll get over it. If not, with his character, his friendship would not be a big loss to me.

[Fantasy GM]

Was he actually on duty as a Bartender when you met with him at the bar? If so, most bars have strong policies against employees drinking while on duty. He should lose this argument based of iresponsiility. It sounds like you're covered as far proof goes. Your buddy may be pissed if the trade goes through, but he'll get over it. If not, with his character, his friendship would not be a big loss to me.

-Yes he was on-duty at the time. Combined with how I saw him, it was why I even went though with the talks. Surely if he's bartending, he can't get drunk while at work, right?
-He is fine with the trade going through. Not thrilled, but he said it's ok.

[pjalst]

It's a huge liability for bartenders to serve alcohol if they themselves have been drinking and would you want your employees handling large amounts of cash while intoxicated?




Can i get some help please:http://www.fantasybaseballcafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=437557

[Urban Cohorts]

What you said here justifies not reversing the trade-

At this point, I make the trade official. It goes through the 2-day voting window successfully and the trade is league-approved.

It would be one thing if he immediately contacted you the next day and said he had been drinking, and thus wanted to take the trade back. So unless he was completely wasted for three straight days (or two and a half I suppose), I would not reverse the trade. And even if he was wasted that long, it would merely be a courtesy to reverse it. You by no means goaded him into it.

[fast dogs]

There is no general poilcy for drunken trades, however you might want to have trades be accepted thru a trade function of the league to eliminate this in the future. Once you hit the accept button, the decision is made, not lets continue to talk about this, I think I want to do it; its just done.
He should have got the e-mail saying the trade was in the voting period, if he wanted it reversed before the period ended it could have been reversed.Its a tough spot as commish, I'd have trouble feeling good about getting a "nice trade" if it wasn't totally wanted by the other owner. But I think he missed the opportunity to have it reversed. If no 1 else has a problem with the deal, let it go; if it causes any question about the fairness of the league and especially the commish, its probably not worth it

[bigmck]

If being druck can overturn a trade, then Temporary Insanity should also be a reason. I am sure that many of us could claim this defense on trades in the past. == Your bartender friend loses on this one.

[converge241]

^ truth

He has remorse and being "inebriated" is the attempted loophole

No buys!

[mkultra]

I sent him a note later that night writing out the players and picks being moved in the deal and asked if he approved it. He wrote back saying he approved.

At this point, I make the trade official. It goes through the 2-day voting window successfully and the trade is league-approved.

If this is the trade process outlined in your league's constitution, then that's all that matters. The only acceptable extenuating circumstances are things that are obvious, like being in the hospital or having your email account hacked. "Drunk" is a totally unacceptable ploy.

[dmendro]

RFLMAO at this thread. Too funny.