Loan contracts (agreements) and IOUs have different purposes. The loan contract (agreement) describes the process of your loan and the agreement that both parties must abide by. The IOU describes the fact that the loan occurred, indicating that you gave him money that day. The IOU can be inconsistent with the time when the loan contract (agreement) occurred, and the IOU shall prevail. As for the guarantee conditions, it should be stipulated in the loan contract, or a separate guarantee contract should be signed, and the guarantee contract must be associated with the loan contract. The loan contract is the main contract, and both the guarantee contract and the loan bill belong to the sub-contract. The time and date shall be based on the specific date of the subcontract, but the subcontract will only take effect if there is a main contract.
The difference between the two:
1. Different ways of establishment: According to the Contract Law, "a contract is an agreement between natural persons, legal persons and other organizations with equal subjects to establish, change and terminate civil rights and obligations". A loan contract is a contract in which the borrower borrows money from the lender, repays the loan at maturity and pays interest. When a loan contract (written) is established, it is generally signed (sealed) by both parties through consultation. Under normal circumstances, after the contract is established, it will be performed again, and the establishment and performance are separated. Typical bank loans are operated in this way; There are also individual agreements, and the contract is established and implemented immediately. White bars are mainly used for private lending. According to the folk lending habit, after the two parties reach an agreement and perform it immediately, the borrower pays the loan to the other party, and the other party immediately presents (establishes) the IOU to the lender. In other words, the lender holds an IOU to prove that the loan will definitely happen. It can be seen that the establishment of the loan contract is not necessarily related to the first performance of the contractual obligations (loan payment); However, the establishment of IOUs must be related to the first performance of contractual obligations (loan payment).
2. The legal meaning of "holding" documents is different. The loan contract is usually made in duplicate, one for each party. From the above analysis, it can be seen that holding a loan contract has no legal significance to prove whether the agreed obligations have been fulfilled (occurred), but only to prove the establishment (or entry into force) of the contract and the specific contents reached by both parties. Generally speaking, only one IOU is written by the borrower and handed over to the lender when the loan is repaid. Therefore, the lender (creditor) "holds" the receipt, which can prove that the lender paid the loan to the borrower and the borrower received the loan. Therefore, the legal meaning of "holding" IOU is different from that of "holding" loan contract, and there may be another different legal meaning, which is embodied in the following points.
3. The repayment certificate is different. The loan is to be repaid. Theoretically, any loan document should have repayment time (although it is not clear in practice, it does not mean that repayment is not needed). Holding a loan contract or an iou to prove whether to repay the loan has different functions. According to the general operation flow of IOUs for private use, when a loan (delivered) occurs, the debtor issues IOUs and gives them to the creditors for holding. When the debtor repays the loan, the creditor will return the due bill to the debtor. Therefore, if the creditor holds the IOU, it can also prove that the debtor has not repaid. If the due bill has a clear repayment time, "holding" can be divided into holding before the repayment time and holding after the repayment time. The "holding" before the repayment time cannot prove the debtor's breach of contract; However, if the creditor still holds the IOU after the repayment time, it can be preliminarily proved that the debtor failed to repay the loan, which constitutes a breach of contract (of course, it does not rule out that the creditor failed to perform the debt due to breach of contract, and the so-called "deposit" is designed for this purpose). Therefore, the creditor's "holding" after the repayment time can generally be used as proof of his creditor's rights: that is, to prove the debtor's breach of contract. Because the "holding" of the loan contract is not necessarily related to the performance of the contractual obligations, holding the loan contract cannot be used to prove that the debtor failed to repay the loan. Even if the "holding" time is later than the repayment time agreed in the contract, it cannot prove that the debtor failed to repay the debt and constitutes a breach of contract.
4. Conclusion There are obvious differences between loan contracts and IOUs, and the legal meaning of "holding" is different and should not be equated. Not only loan contracts, but also other contracts that can form the relationship between creditor's rights and debts are different from "mature bills". In judicial practice, the function and legal significance of "due bill" cannot be copied to "xx contract". In the judicial process, creditors can prove their subsequent claims with "IOUs", and IOUs can be established to fulfill the burden of proof and reach the standard of proof they should achieve. However, whether to close the case according to this point requires cross-examination and the other party is allowed to defend: 1. The loan has been delivered to the debtor; 2. The debtor fails to repay the loan; 3. The debtor fails to repay the promissory note beyond the repayment time agreed upon, which constitutes a breach of contract (if the "holding" time has exceeded the repayment time). After cross-examination and defense, if there is no evidence to the contrary (except the statement of the other party), the judicial organ shall support its claim. The creditor can't effectively prove his above-mentioned creditor's rights by holding a "loan contract". Alternatively, the Loan Contract and My Statement can be used as evidence to file a case, but once the other party refuses to recognize it, the judicial organ should not support its claim.
Relevant laws and regulations
Contract law of the people's Republic of China
Article 196 A loan contract is a contract in which the borrower borrows money from the lender, repays the loan at maturity and pays interest.
Article 197 A loan contract shall be in written form, unless otherwise agreed by the natural person.
The contents of the loan contract include the loan type, currency, purpose, amount, interest rate, term and repayment method.