Home · Calculator · How Notice Delivery Works Under the TREC Contract's Notices Paragraph
TREC ¶ 21 explained

How Notice Delivery Works Under the TREC Contract's Notices Paragraph

Email, mail, hand delivery, or overnight courier — and the one word ("sent," not "received") that decides who's on time.

By Heath Shepard, Texas REALTOR® Updated 2026-08-12

Every TREC-promulgated Texas residential contract runs on deadlines — option period, financing approval, title objections, closing. Every one of those deadlines can be shortened, waived, or blown entirely by a single question: did the notice actually go out in a way the contract recognizes? TREC Form 20-19's ¶ 21 (Notices) answers that question, and it changed meaningfully from the prior form. This guide walks through exactly how notice delivery works under the current contract, what counts as "delivered," and where agents and TCs get it wrong.

¶ 21's current text

TREC Form 20-19 (effective 07/01/2026) ¶ 21 reads: "All notices from one party or their agent to the other must be in writing. Notices are effective when mailed to, hand-delivered at, sent by overnight courier to, or transmitted by electronic transmission to the other party or their agent." Four methods, and a contact block for each: Buyer, Seller, Seller's agent, and Buyer's agent each get their own address/phone/email lines.

The method that disappeared: fax

Prior versions of the form (20-17, 20-18) listed fax as a valid delivery method alongside mail, hand delivery, and electronic transmission. 20-19 drops fax entirely and adds overnight courier as a named method instead. If your file still references faxing a notice under a current-form contract, that's not one of the methods the form text defines anymore — use mail, hand delivery, overnight courier, or electronic transmission (email or text, per how the parties filled in ¶ 21's contact blocks).

The nuance that matters most: effective when sent, not when received

Read ¶ 21 closely: notices are effective when mailed, hand-delivered, sent by courier, or transmitted electronically. Every verb describes an act of the sender, not an act of the recipient. Nothing in ¶ 21 says a notice has to be opened, read, or even seen to count — it says the notice is effective at the moment of dispatch. That's a real, operative difference from a "received" standard, and it cuts both ways: it protects the sender who dispatched on time even if the other side claims they never saw it, and it means a recipient can be legally on the clock for a notice they haven't yet opened.

Why this isn't just theory: this exact distinction shows up twice in the same contract. ¶ 18E (Escrow) says the Escrow Agent's own notices are effective when sent, in compliance with ¶ 21 — same sent-based rule. But a party's notice of objection to a demand sent to the Escrow Agent is "deemed effective upon receipt by Escrow Agent" — the opposite rule, in the same paragraph. TREC drafted both standards deliberately and used them in different places. Read whichever specific paragraph governs the notice you're sending before assuming ¶ 21's sent-based rule always applies.

How this interacts with the option period's 5:00 PM deadline

¶ 5B (Termination Option) requires the buyer's notice of termination to be given "by 5:00 p.m. (local time where the Property is located) by the date specified." ¶ 21 supplies the definition of what "given" means for that deadline: if the buyer's agent transmits the termination notice electronically at 4:58 PM on the last day of the option period, the notice is effective at that moment under ¶ 21 — it does not matter whether the seller or seller's agent opens the email at 4:59 PM or the next morning. Conversely, an unopened, unread notice sent one minute after 5:00 PM is late, full stop, regardless of when it's eventually seen. See our full option period breakdown for the rest of ¶ 5B's mechanics, and TREC 38-8 for the termination notice form itself.

Does email actually count without more?

Yes — but there's a statutory layer underneath the contract worth understanding, not just the form language. Texas's Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Texas Business & Commerce Code Chapter 322) generally applies electronic-record rules only "between parties each of which has agreed to conduct transactions by electronic means," and that agreement is judged from context and conduct, not a separate signed consent form (Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 322.005(b)). In practice, a party who fills in an email address on ¶ 21's contact block, and who has been transacting by email throughout the deal, has established exactly that context. Absent a contrary agreement, Chapter 322 also has its own default rules for when an electronic record is legally "sent" and "received" (§ 322.015) — but ¶ 21 is itself an agreement that varies those defaults for notices under this contract, which UETA expressly allows parties to do. The practical upshot: for TREC-contract notices, ¶ 21's "effective when sent" language controls, not a generic "did they receive and open it" standard.

What if a party never filled in an email address?

¶ 21's contact blocks are blank lines — Buyer, Seller, Seller's agent, and Buyer's agent each get their own Address/Phone/Email fields, and nothing requires all of them to be completed. If a party's line was left blank for a given method, sending a notice to that unlisted channel is a weaker position if delivery is ever disputed. Flag incomplete ¶ 21 blocks before execution — it's a two-minute fix at contract signing and a real headache during a disputed termination.

Practical checklist for agents and TCs

The bottom line: ¶ 21 makes Texas contract notices effective at the moment of dispatch — by mail, hand delivery, overnight courier, or electronic transmission — not at the moment of receipt. Fax was dropped from the current form. That sent-based standard is what lets a 4:58 PM email beat a 5:00 PM option deadline, and it's why documenting the moment you hit send matters more than chasing a reply.
Not legal advice: This explains how ¶ 21 reads on the current TREC form and how it maps to Texas's electronic-transactions statute. It isn't a substitute for a licensed Texas attorney's review of a specific disputed-delivery scenario, a contract with non-standard notice language, or a transaction involving parties who never agreed to electronic notice at all.

Try the calculator

If a notice's timing is close, run the underlying deadline through the calculator below before you rely on a send-timestamp alone.

Stop tracking deadlines manually.

Dossie tracks every TREC deadline for every active deal — plus follow-ups, document QA, and contract scanning. Built for Texas agents.

Start for $149/mo →

Frequently asked

Can I still fax a notice under the current TREC contract? +
Fax was removed from the Notices paragraph in TREC 20-19. Prior forms (20-17, 20-18) listed fax as a valid delivery method; 20-19 lists only mail, hand delivery, overnight courier, and electronic transmission. On a current-form contract, faxing a notice isn't one of the methods the contract text defines as effective.
Is a notice delivered when I send it, or when the other side reads it? +
When you send it. TREC 20-19 ¶ 21 says notices are effective when mailed, hand-delivered, sent by overnight courier, or transmitted electronically -- every verb describes the sender's act, not the recipient's. Nothing in ¶ 21 requires the notice to be opened or read to be effective.
Does that mean I can email a termination notice at 4:59 PM on the option deadline and still be on time? +
Based on ¶ 21's plain language, yes -- the notice is effective when transmitted, so a timely-sent email satisfies ¶ 5B's 5:00 p.m. deadline even if the other side doesn't open it until later. This is exactly the kind of timing-sensitive, dispute-prone scenario where, if it's ever contested, you should get a licensed Texas attorney's read on your specific facts rather than relying solely on this guide.
Are notices to the Escrow Agent handled the same way? +
Not entirely. ¶ 18E says the Escrow Agent's own notices are effective when sent, consistent with ¶ 21. But a party's notice of objection to a demand, sent to the Escrow Agent, is deemed effective only upon receipt by the Escrow Agent -- the opposite standard, in the same paragraph. Check which specific notice you're sending before assuming the sent-based rule always applies.
Do both parties have to agree in writing to receive notices by email? +
Not necessarily in a separate document. Texas's Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Bus. & Com. Code § 322.005(b)) says agreement to conduct transactions electronically is judged from context and conduct, not a standalone consent form. Filling in an email address on ¶ 21's contact block, combined with transacting by email throughout the deal, is ordinarily enough context. If a party never provided an email address or never engaged electronically, that's a materially weaker position for email notice and worth flagging.
What should a TC do to protect a file if notice delivery is ever disputed? +
Confirm ¶ 21's contact blocks (address, phone, email) are complete for both parties and both agents before the contract goes effective, send time-sensitive notices through a channel that timestamps automatically, save sent confirmations regardless of whether you get a read receipt, and for true deadline-day notices consider sending through two independent methods (for example, email plus a phone call) so a disputed 'I never got it' claim has less to stand on.