 
Ark
join:2002-06-08
Hudsonville, MI
edit:
April 19th, @11:17AM
| Legal? I don't see how that would be any less legal than those checks you get for $20 in the mail every single day that say 'By cashing this check, you agree to have your phone service switched to (some other company)' | |
|
 | 
Mtav80
Premium
join:2002-12-28
Loveland, CO | Re: Legal? Legal or not it is funny.  | |
|
| | |
| 
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
Albany, NY
| Well, those checks aren't payment for services rendered. In that case, the check is a waiver of some entry fee. E.g. It costs $20 to sign up so here's a check for $20 and we'll sign you up when you cash it.
In the article's case, this is payment for services rendered. He's used their service for the last month and is being billed for it. He owes them a debt and must pay it up. He can't stipulate terms at this point. Would you eat a meal in a restaurant and try to haggle over the price when the bill comes?
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|
| | scomps
join:2001-06-05
Utica, NY
| Re: Legal? Don't most cable company's bill you ahead of the period? I know I got my May RR bill last week. If that's the case it's not for "services rendered" but more a payment for future services.
--
Scott Johnson -- developer of MWall. Contact me for more information. | |
|
| | |
Ark
join:2002-06-08
Hudsonville, MI
 ·AT&T Midwest
| Re: Legal? Yes, actually, most probably do. I know I was billed in advance for Comcrap's $60 basic cable (no internet) before I switched to Dish. 5 months after I disconnected, I got a refund check for $46 in the mail for a partial month refund. I had completely forgot all about that. That refund covers a month and a half of Dish service, which is also billed in advance. | |
|
| |
Ark
join:2002-06-08
Hudsonville, MI
·AT&T Midwest
| said by Jason Levine  :Well, those checks aren't payment for services rendered. In that case, the check is a waiver of some entry fee. E.g. It costs $20 to sign up so here's a check for $20 and we'll sign you up when you cash it. Well then just say the terms on the check are just for starting with the next upcoming billing cycle. I don't really see how this changes anything.
said by Jason Levine :In the article's case, this is payment for services rendered. He's used their service for the last month and is being billed for it. He owes them a debt and must pay it up. He can't stipulate terms at this point. Debt doesn't mean he cannot stipulate terms. I don't believe they are obligated to accept the payment if it has attached terms, but the fact that its debt is meaningless here. They can very well refuse payment and disconnect him. Any part of his little agreement that tries to say what they can do if they don't accept the payment is obviously a joke.
said by Jason Levine :Would you eat a meal in a restaurant and try to haggle over the price when the bill comes? If the meal or services was bad, perhaps I would. That is probably a lot more common in some other countries than we would guess here too. | |
|
| | thesus
join:2005-04-19
Erie, PA
| Actually most users pay for services on the next month, just like if you rent a house you pay for living there the next month, so if you look at it that way then yes it is leagal for him to make such claims, however if you look further down this
thread, yes, most ISP's do have clauses that after the initial
contract is signed that no new stipulations/changes can be ammended by the user, however it can be ammended by the ISP. BTW i do work for an ISP. | |
|
| | DiskDrive
Goin' In Circles
Premium
join:2004-11-03
Farmington, MI
| said by Jason Levine :In the article's case, this is payment for services rendered. He's used their service for the last month and is being billed for it. I agree that the text as stipulated is on shaky ground (especially the clauses for not accepting the payment). That said, in most cases, bills for things like telecommunications services (POTS, cell phones, cable TV, Internet services, etc.) are usually billed in advance of the service period they cover. Excess usage charges, long distance, PPV, etc. are often the only things billed in arrears. | |
|
| | 
IronChefMoto
Premium
join:2001-02-08
Alpharetta, GA
| said by Jason Levine :Would you eat a meal in a restaurant and try to haggle over the price when the bill comes? If the soup tastes like the shit, you must aquit...me of my financial obligation to this restaurant. Chewbacca said so!
IronChefMorimoto
--
Shuttle SK83G | AMD Athlon64 3400+ / Abit NF7-S 2.0 | AMD AthlonXP 2500+
Shuttle SK41G | Athlon XP 1800+ / Dell Latitude C810 | Intel PIII-M | |
|
| | 
Kaltes
Premium
join:2002-12-04
Los Angeles, CA
| said by Jason Levine :Well, those checks aren't payment for services rendered. In that case, the check is a waiver of some entry fee. E.g. It costs $20 to sign up so here's a check for $20 and we'll sign you up when you cash it. In the article's case, this is payment for services rendered. He's used their service for the last month and is being billed for it. He owes them a debt and must pay it up. He can't stipulate terms at this point. Would you eat a meal in a restaurant and try to haggle over the price when the bill comes? #1. He is paying in advance, not after. Everyone bills in advance now. It would be very unusual to do anything else.
#2. He has the right to attempt to renegotiate the contract as a condition of payment. Businesses do this all the time. It leads to something in contract law called "the battle of the forms" where companies send eachother inconsistent contracts.
#3. The ISP has the right to refuse to accept his check and disconnect his service. If the ISP accepts his checks then they are bound to his terms in the same way you are bound to the TOS changes they include with your bill. | |
|
| | 
TheHelpful1
Premium
join:2002-01-11
Upper Marlboro, MD
·EarthLink
| said by Jason Levine : Would you eat a meal in a restaurant and try to haggle over the price when the bill comes? If the service was horrible, the waiter or waitress was rude, and there was a bug in the soup, who wouldn't complain about the price?
I.e. slow speeds, poor customer support and...lost packets?
--
"My weakness is that I care too much" | |
|
| | | |
jwsmiths4
Part Man, Part Mac
Premium
join:2003-10-25
Savannah, GA | Awesome! Would be very interesting to see if this really would hold up in court -- not that I'd count on it, but it would be a cool case to see none the less. | |
|
| 
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Awesome! It would never hold up in any court. It has about as much chance as writing "Account paid in full" on a partial credit card payment. Just because it's there doesn't mean it holds any water.
--
Win some of $250 in prizes. Try your luck with The Amazing Race Contest. | |
|
| |
jwsmiths4
Part Man, Part Mac
Premium
join:2003-10-25
Savannah, GA | Re: Awesome! Yeah but as has been noted elsewhere there have been examples of people actually successfully suing companies that failed to abide by their User EULAs... It was just a cool thought.
Justin | |
|
cbrigante2
Cubs 20??
Premium
join:2002-11-22
North Aurora, IL | That's great! This one had me lol. I wonder what type of response we would get if everyone did this? If the user EULA talked about privacy rights, that might be another issue in the courts. | |
|
| 
jwersan
R.I.P. Mom, Brian, Ziggy, and RichK1957
Premium
join:2004-12-20
Port Jefferson Station, NY
clubs: | Re: That's great! God I WISH this would hold up in court....
I wonder if a USER EULA is legal??? | |
|
B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28
| Illiterate Lawyer
What English-speaking "lawyer" could possibly approve this childish language?
if you fail to take my payment as is then you give up the right to go after me for money and also give up the right to disconnect my service -- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function | |
|
| ITOscar
join:2004-08-04
Dayton, OH | Re: Illiterate Lawyer I have to agree with this - doesn't sound like any lawyer approved license agreement i have evr read | |
|
| Newegg
Supreme Ideology
join:2004-11-14
Atlanta, GA | Ya it's not that well written. | |
|
| | 
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
 ·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
| Re: Illiterate Lawyer said by Newegg :Ya it's not that well written. Sorry, but lawyers write horribly. A primary function of their job is to torture language so as to make it such that only other lawyers can understand. Even then, that 'understanding' comes only after protracted court procedings designed to come to an agreement on what the words actually meant and what they mean within the current legal and cultural context.
So, if there was any indication that this wasn't lawyer written it would be because its meaning is to plain.
-tom
--
"Some people have morals, standards and ideals about quality, but I'm an American: I couldn't care less." --Tony Pierce (paraphrased) | |
|
| 
rtcpenguin
Premium
join:2001-01-21
Fairfax, VA
·Cox HSI
| said by B :What English-speaking "lawyer" could possibly approve this childish language? if you fail to take my payment as is then you give up the right to go after me for money and also give up the right to disconnect my service -- B True...also "refuse to cap/throttling my service" was a little strange.
Funny still, but I doubt they would accept it.
--
Will you still remember, There behind the skies, Walking on the embers, Standing in their light -FF | |
|
| 
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA | "Failing to take my money" doesn't signify the positive acceptance of an agreement. You can't say "by cashing this check you agree to ABC, by failing to cash this check you agree to XYZ." | |
|
| | 
ROCINANTE 2112
Original Member 007
join:1999-06-29
Hartsdale, NY
clubs:
| Re: Illiterate Lawyer Of course not, you cannot stipulate terms for the other party if they do not agree to them directly. It's frivolous. On the other hand, the guy agreed to pay for services on the compay's terms when he signed up for the service. That overrides any stupid stipulation scribbled on a check. He should call billing if he has a problem with the service and seek credit for his next bill.
--
CRUNCH THIS!
| |
|
| | | 
mustang03282
join:2003-01-10
Bridgeton, NJ
clubs:
| Re: Illiterate Lawyer alout of poeple signed up for their service with their isp's and were told its unlimited. I know there is a on going debate here on what unlimited means but most of us ask can i download 24x7 at what ever speed my computer will pull and the csr will say yes. Isp's put in this bs of if you pay your bill you agree to what ever terms we decide. So i dont se whats wrong with the customer trying to do they same. Weather it holds up in court or not isnt the point its just funny seeing someone useing a isp's own tactics against them | |
|
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
Albany, NY
| It's not just the phrasing of it. How can you force someone to do something if they don't accept your EULA? Especially something like continue to provide service (at no cost since they won't cash his EULA-payments). Imagine the uproar if a cable ISP put a clause in their EULA stating "if you leave our service you agree not to use a competing service for a period of one year."
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
|
| | 
L0GiX
When all else fails, theres always L0GiX
Premium
join:2000-06-30
South Bay,CA
clubs:
·Speakeasy
| Re: Illiterate Lawyer said by Jason Levine :Imagine the uproar if a cable ISP put a clause in their EULA stating "if you leave our service you agree not to use a competing service for a period of one year." Employers do that all the time. Although its contested in several states.
--
-=It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.=- | |
|
| | | |
| | | |
L0GiX
When all else fails, theres always L0GiX
Premium
join:2000-06-30
South Bay,CA
clubs:
·Speakeasy
| Re: Illiterate Lawyer Well if you break it down to its simpliest view. An Employeer hires a person to provide a service. Much like a company hires a vendor, or a person hires a company to provide service.
Now whats different is that the previous two circumstances are expected to negotiate a contract and agreement.
As a person the cable/isp/gas/telephone/etc... services won't let you negotiate.
Now also understand a contact is only as good as it can stand up in court and that is only tested until it is taken there for a judge to decide on. Even then the judgement can be challenged again and again. No contract is air tight. There is always a way out of it.
--
-=It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.=- | |
|
| 
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
·RoadRunner Cable
| The wording might be childish, but what it says could very well be approved. Proper English grammar never voided a contract before. I have seen quite a few legal documents that contain run on sentences as large as an entire page. Then you have those simple written agreements that have held up in the civil courts all this time.
Apparently the laws of grammar don't hold much in the court of law. Probably because you have judicial rights regardless of how literate you are. As long as you can reasonably interpret what the document is saying it probably can hold water. | |
|
| | B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28
| Re: Illiterate Lawyer
No argument with that, SRFireside ] -- my suspicion was cast on the purported lawyer approval, or lack thereof.
lawyer approved (so he claims) Was that parenthetical remark just added to the article?
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function | |
|
| | |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Illiterate Lawyer Probably a non-legal fee "consultation" got that approval. Maybe the lawyer in question just looked it over while on his way to lunch and said, "yeah yeah, that works...", all the while thinking about that T-Bone he's getting at Steak n' Ale. | |
|
vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
·Comcast
| The original EULA I bet most ISP's have a clause in their EULA that says the user is not allowed to specify their own terms, and any other terms the user forces the ISP to accept are null and void. I'm not sure if they do have that, I'm just guessing. If they don't now, they will soon. | |
|
|
See 14 replies to this post |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| it is legitimate I don't remember the details, but some years ago a guy did something very similar - wrote on the back of a check that by cashing it, a company agreed to abide by whatever he had stipulated. The company violated the stipulation and he took them to court and won. | |
|
| scomps
join:2001-06-05
Utica, NY
| Re: it is legitimate Rogers being a Canadian corporation would be subject to Canadian law. I don't know if it's any more or less restrictive, but legitimate in this case is based on jurisdiction.
--
Scott Johnson -- developer of MWall. Contact me for more information. | |
|
| |
| 
clickwir
join:2001-06-21
Dickson City, PA | As that case might have been... however most ISP's already have it in their EULA that something like this is void.
So by signing up for service the customer has already agreed to their EULA and then cannot change it afterwards. | |
|
| | 
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0 | Re: it is legitimate It's not considered legitimate in Canadian law unless the payee has been notified in advance and had the opportunity to respond.
As mentioned, they have every right to terminate his service. | |
|
nologin
| strike out Rogers has the right to to strike out any offensive language before it cashes the check. | |
|
sadowski
I Am My Own Doppelganger
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-14
Buffalo, NY
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Cute but no sale It doesn't matter what you put on the cheques. You made a commitment based on your sign-up agreement. To change that you must do so with the appropriate corporate authority. Since the cheque cashing process is not the appropriate means and is most likely fully automated anyway, there is no agreement of the minds.
This is like that nonsense with people saying in their sigs you pay me if you spam or you pay me if you archive my news posts, etc. etc.
--
Air America Radio | The Brights | |
|
|
kcjames9
@kcnet.com
| Re: Cute but no sale Its not non-sense.
Section 3-311 of the Uniform Commercial Code does state that a debt can be discharged with a check designated as payment in full "if the person against whom the claim is asserted proves that the instrument or an accompanying written communication contained a conspicuous statement to the effect that the instrument was tendered as full satisfaction of the claim." However, it's up to the claimant to prove "that within a reasonable time before collection of the instrument was initiated, the claimant, or an agent of the claimant having direct responsibility with respect to the disputed obligation, knew that the instrument was tendered in full satisfaction of the claim." So if you receive a check marked "paid in full" made out for less than the amount you have agreed upon, you'd best not cross out the words "paid in full" or write "disputed" on it and cash it anyway, as you risk having the entire debt discharged. However, this condition does not apply to "transactions conducted or performed, in whole or in part, by electronic means or electronic records, in which the acts or records of one or both parties are not reviewed by an individual in the ordinary course [of business]," which means that this scheme will not work at all for most bill or credit card payments, as those payments are typically handled by automated systems and not humans. | |
|
| | L2006
join:2001-12-03
Stratford, ON
| Re: Cute but no sale A check isn't the proper place for the EULA... the person who cashes the check may only have the authority to cash cheques, and not make legal decisions on the company behalf.
So if they cash the cheque, who is liable now??
1) The bank for cashing it?
2) The vendor for not reading it?
3) The corporate check casher who didn't forward it to management?
4) The customer for not sending it to the right office for review and acceptance?
I"m sure you have to pay your debt based on the appropriate EULA agreed upon at sign up... I don't think you can customize your EULA each time you make a payment. | |
|
| | | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: Cute but no sale Typically, I would assume #4.
Payment is required. Attaching a payment clause could cause the vendor to reject it, and you would then have to worry about late fees, or service cancellation (and cancellation fees) which is based on your TOS. | |
|
| | |
|
|
anonpronman
@optonline.net | Re: You (ISP) Agree,. If you wrote that on your check you'd have a free year of service.
This is the Law and your with in your rights.
In the USA that is.
Thanks
Pornman | |
|
| | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| Re: You (ISP) Agree,. said by anonpronman:If you wrote that on your check you'd have a free year of service. This is the Law and your with in your rights. In the USA that is. Thanks Pornman Uh, no you wouldn't. No court would recognize that. | |
|
| 
netwire
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Mooresboro, NC | I'm no lawyer, and I may be bias but I think my wording was pretty good.  | |
|
| | Hey Norm
join:2004-08-18
Saint Charles, IL | Re: You (ISP) Agree,. i think it's hi-larious at how petty people are getting with this, and how nit picky the arguments have become.
i say trim away the fat and bs - if this pans out for him, then rock on! if not, then it was worth the shot.:D | |
|
Wejo
@65.242.x.x | my 0.02$ 1) the dude will lose;
2) ISP will get in emotional distress and cave in;
3) both parties will have a meeting and nothing will happen;
4) ISP will declare bankruptcy;
5) check was forged;
6) none of the above;
7) all of the above; | |
|
ctceo
Premium
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN
clubs:
edit:
April 19th, @04:02PM
| Check A check is a binding Legal Contract in all states and commonwealths that will stand up in court.
for the longest I had trouble with my local utility holding my checks for 30 days or more before they would cash them, so I started printing on both the front and back of the check "void after 7 days, failure to adhere to this clause will constitute theft", and I would send via receipt confirmation.
They tried to cash a check once after the 7 day limit had been imposed (on the 21st day that was, they received it 3 days after I sent it, a Monday to be precise) and I took them to small claims court and won, the bank had to pay me back the money, they had to pay the bank to cover their losses, and court costs, they haven't done that since. They also send out a man EVERY month for a manual meter reading all "estimates" ceased from that day forth as a result of the court case.
So, yes, he can regardless of wether he is paying in the rear (figuratively or literally) he has a right to make his payment accompany an amendment to their EULA. Everyone has the right to modify ANY contract they sign and the party to which is expected to agree to this has the right to reject the changes, that also means disconnect service until an agreement can be made! | |
|
| wentlanc
You Can't Fix Dumb..
join:2003-07-30
Maineville, OH | Re: Check I think not. You may be able to stipulate the expiration of your check, but you cannot alter an agreement to give you free service for life if they cancel you. if it worked, people would have been doing it for years now.
puritan | |
|
| |
ctceo
Premium
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN
clubs:
| Re: Check Making up the most extreme possible thing that one could do, does not constitute anything. If say for example I stipulated that by accepting this payment they are agreeing to give me 1 months free service, would be valid, or that they agree to allow me to try the best package they have for a month. But for life that wouldn't stand in court, smaller things would. I could say for example issue an amendment to my EULA.
Nice try though.
--
ASUS SK8N nForce3 - 8GB PC2700 - AXP 64 3400+ - nVidia 6800 Ultra w/512mb - CL Audigy 2 PP - WD SATA150 36GB + Hitachi GST 250GB - Plextor PX708A + Sony CRX300A - Dual 600 Watt PSU's. | |
|
skylabpc
join:2002-03-31
La Canada Flintridge, CA | lawyer reviewed this....riiiiiiigggggghhhhtttttt
Any competant atty. would have changed language such as "go after me for money" | |
|
ssj4android
Redefining Reality
join:2002-04-14
Wyoming, MI
| What about sites that let you edit the EULA box? I know some sites I registered on used editable text boxes for the EULA. What if I erased their's, put in something like "[The site] agrees to give (insert my name) $1 million, payable in cash within one (1) month of the date of the creation of a account on this site. [The site] signifies the acceptance of these terms by granting the applicant an account" | |
|
| |
|
|
|
Make ISPs Read YOUR Fine Print
Re: Legal?
·
·
·
