Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.
-
@pandora said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
Yet another edition of Vampire the Masquerade. Fueling no doubt another deluge of WoD cookie-cutter MUSHes this year.
As an avid player of the game, I too am angered by this.
Like, holy shit, staaaaaaaaahp. Enough widdis.
-
-
Any board lawyers wanna take a crack at this one?
(this is why my job gives me a headache btw. and this is one of the more polite 'I'm gonna pretend I'm a lawyer in my spare time' customers)
Saying the quiet parts out loud since 1996.
-
As a non-lawyer I'm pretty sure that unless you signed an agreement under duress or false pretenses it's legally binding.
However if you're famous enough or rich enough you can ignore that sort of thing.
'Murica!
-
The case law he is referring to really only comes into play in cases where the terms of adhesion contracts are somehow unconscionable. But just go ahead and forward that to legal, to be on the safe side.
Also, #NotALawyerQuiteYet, just to be clear.
Racism isn't Tinkerbell. It doesn't need you to believe in it for it to exist.
-
It took me longer than I care to admit to realize I had only taken one of my contact lenses out as I walked around the house in confusion, rubbing the eye whose vision was blurry 'all of a sudden' to try and clear it.
- He who takes offense when not intended is a fool. He who takes offense when intended is a greater fool.
-
@arkandel I went to get in the shower the other day and had forgotten to take my glasses off. Queue confusion as to why I suddenly had water spots everywhere in my vision.
Hello! Long time listener, first time caller...
-
@lithium said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
@arkandel I went to get in the shower the other day and had forgotten to take my glasses off. Queue confusion as to why I suddenly had water spots everywhere in my vision.
I do this all too often.
I have also tried to put my other pair of glasses on atop the pair I am already wearing (instead of bifocals I have two separate pairs of glasses).
-
I did once forget to take my contact lenses out before going to sleep then woke up the next morning with my eyes feeling awful.
Then I put in a pair of contact lenses and wondered why I was also apparently mostly blind. It was scary! Then realization dawned.
-
@packrat I've had to sleep in my contacts before, it is not fun, your eyes wake up all gummy and horrible feeling and it is so /hard/ to get the contact lenses off even after putting in a ton of solution/drops.
-
Reminds me of this old gross story: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/07/17/health/contact-lens-uk-trnd/index.html
Tl;Dr Doctors find 27 contact lenses in woman's eye
-
That person is a non-lawyer, and it shows.
As Derp mentioned, the person is referring to what lawyers call an "adhesion contract." A contract of adhesion is one where there has been no meaningful negotiation or opportunity to refuse the terms. The problem with raising it as a defense is that the terms at issue must be considered "unconscionable," and there has to be some evidence that the party challenging the terms did not have a meaningful opportunity to negotiate.
Convincing a court to not enforce a term in an adhesion contract is an uphill climb. If you executed the contract, the presumption is that you agreed to all of its terms. The party challenging the terms bears the burden of proving that the terms are objectively "unconscionable."
Good luck with that.
No sane, practicing lawyer dives in with that defense at the fore. Those that do will get blown out of the water. In the context of lending, that kind of defense hardly ever works, and a bank has a legal team that will take a claimant to the mat every damn day.
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
-
@ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
That person is a non-lawyer, and it shows.
As Derp mentioned, the person is referring to what lawyers call an "adhesion contract." A contract of adhesion is one where there has been no meaningful negotiation or opportunity to refuse the terms. The problem with raising it as a defense is that the terms at issue must be considered "unconscionable," and there has to be some evidence that the party challenging the terms did not have a meaningful opportunity to negotiate.
Convincing a court to not enforce a term in an adhesion contract is an uphill climb. If you executed the contract, the presumption is that you agreed to all of its terms. The party challenging the terms bears the burden of proving that the terms are objectively "unconscionable."
Good luck with that.
No sane, practicing lawyer dives in with that defense at the fore. Those that do will get blown out of the water. In the context of lending, that kind of defense hardly ever works, and a bank has a legal team that will take a claimant to the mat every damn day.
This is largely what I felt.
Mostly I just wanted to see if I was right in thinking it.
I get these sorts of emails all the time. Just not usually to this extent. Usually it's either a threat to get a lawyer, or a (badly written) threat that they are a lawyer. "I never agreed to these terms!"
Yes. You did. By signing up. Like any other website. You ticky the box, you agree. We list the prices three times on the second to last page. I gladly provide screenshots upon request!
The worst part is? This is generally over $45. Because the site is a $19.99 for the first month offer, so people ignore that (despite it being on the front page, on the page detailing the package, and then again on that page where it's displayed three times)... and then they get that first monthly charge of $45, they flip out and accuse us of being a scam.
Then out comes the 'I never agreed to the terms!' 'I'm getting a lawyer!'
Over $45.
We've also had people threaten to get the cops involved.
My favorite however, my favorite is when they threaten to contact the Attorney General.
For those I always want to ask if they actually understand what the Attorney General is.
Saying the quiet parts out loud since 1996.
-
@auspice said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
actually understand what the Attorney General is
They'd be these guys' boss, right?
He/Him
-
@ganymede I would need to check the specifics, but I have seen some reference to some aspects of an EULA being thrown out on legal grounds of "you know goddamn well nobody reads those."
But this is, like, in terms of "we snuck some shady shit in the middle of the giant wall o' text you need to agree to to use the software you already bought," not "disputing the service-for-currency arrangement I signed up for."
-
Sorry, Aussie, but Judge Advocate Generals are not the same as the U.S. Attorney General or the Justice Department's District Attorneys.
@insomniac7809 said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
I would need to check the specifics, but I have seen some reference to some aspects of an EULA being thrown out on legal grounds of "you know goddamn well nobody reads those."
In my experience, such "success stories" relate to EULAs which contain arbitration provisions and/or waivers of the right to a jury trial. The reason why those hold up better is because due process is a constitutional guarantee that such provisions abrogate; this goes to the "unconscionable" element. Obviating the cost of services, which is what Auspice is talking about, is entirely different; you'd have to find that the fees charged are unconscionable for the services rendered, which is nigh impossible in the absence of fraud or predatory lending scenarios.
“It is better to live doing the things that you like. It is foolish to live within this dream of a world seeing unpleasantness and doing only things that you do not like.” -- Yamamoto Tsunetomo.
-
-
@ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:
Sorry, Aussie, but Judge Advocate Generals are not the same as the U.S. Attorney General or the Justice Department's District Attorneys.
Oh, I know. We have our own Attorneys General.
-
One of the things that constantly amazes me about my job is how hard it is to get the concept of a "receipt" across to people. No, it is not order forms, invoices, or packing slips. No, you can't just stamp 'paid' on an invoice to prove that you paid.
I have a whole word document I send to people to explain what I look for and they still send me packing slips.
-
"So the thing about that one... I mean... it's just not, kinda. I think. Y'know?"
NO I FUCKING DO NOT KNOW, USE YOUR WORDS
