Home >> Statutes >> Back

Click to open printable format in new window.Printable Format
 | Next

16-118. Requirements; failure to comply. (a) A debtor or a creditor may not maintain an action for legal or equitable relief or a defense, based in either case upon a failure to perform on an alleged credit agreement, unless the material terms and conditions of the agreement are in writing and signed by the creditor and the debtor.

(b) All credit agreements shall contain a clear, conspicuous and printed notice to the debtor that states that the written credit agreement is a final expression of the credit agreement between the creditor and debtor and such written credit agreement may not be contradicted by evidence of any prior oral credit agreement or of a contemporaneous oral credit agreement between the creditor and debtor. A written credit agreement shall contain a sufficient space for the placement of nonstandard terms, including the reduction to writing of a previous oral credit agreement and an affirmation, signed or initialed by the debtor and the creditor, that no unwritten oral credit agreement between the parties exists.

(c) Failure to comply with provisions of subsections (a) and (b) shall preclude an action or defense based on any of the following legal or equitable theories: (1) An implied agreement based on course of dealing or performance or on a fiduciary relationship; (2) promissory or equitable estoppel; (3) part performance; or (4) negligent representation.

History: L. 1988, ch. 55, § 2; L. 1989, ch. 70, § 2; L. 1998, ch. 56, § 2; July 1.

Law Review and Bar Journal References:

"Kansas Legislation Governing Credit Agreements Of Financial Institutions," George L. Calvert III, 59 J.K.B.A. No. 2, 19, 20 (1990).

"Lender Liability in Kansas: A Paradigm of Competing Tort and Contract Theories," Thomas A. Rossi, 29 W.L.J. 495, 515 (1990).

Attorney General's Opinions:

Credit agreements; required notice. 89-19.


1. Claim that bank breached oral agreement to extend loans to borrower properly dismissed on statute of frauds grounds. Wells v. State Bank of Kingman, 24 Kan. App. 2d 394, 395, 945 P.2d 418 (1997).

2. Statute of frauds defense may be overcome by doctrine of promissory estoppel. Bittel v. Farm Credit Svcs. of Central Kansas, P.C.A., 265 Kan. 651, 962 P.2d 491 (1998).

 | Next

  6/03/2024 Meeting Notice 

  LCC Policies

  2023 New, Amended and Repealed by KSA
  2023 New, Amended and Repealed by Bill
  2024 Valid Section Numbers
  Chapter 72 Statute Transfer List
  Kansas School Equity & Enhancement Act
  Gannon v. State
  Information for Special Session 2021
  General Info., Legal Analysis & Research
  2022 Amended & Repealed Statutes
  2021 Amended & Repealed Statutes
  2020 Amended & repealed Statutes
  2019 Amended & Repealed Statutes

Session Laws

Kansas Legislature
Administrative Services
Division of Post Audit
Research Department